Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems, 50282-50441 [2023-14338]
Download as PDF
50282
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 98
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234; FRL–10246–01–
OAR]
RIN 2060–AV83
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule:
Revisions and Confidentiality
Determinations for Petroleum and
Natural Gas Systems
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to amend
requirements that apply to the
petroleum and natural gas systems
source category of the Greenhouse Gas
Reporting Rule to ensure that reporting
is based on empirical data, accurately
reflects total methane emissions and
waste emissions from applicable
facilities, and allows owners and
operators of applicable facilities to
submit empirical emissions data that
appropriately demonstrate the extent to
which a charge is owed. The EPA is also
proposing changes to requirements that
apply to the general provisions, general
stationary fuel combustion, and
petroleum and natural gas systems
source categories of the Greenhouse Gas
Reporting Rule to improve calculation,
monitoring, and reporting of greenhouse
gas data for petroleum and natural gas
systems facilities. This action also
proposes to establish and amend
confidentiality determinations for the
reporting of certain data elements to be
added or substantially revised in these
proposed amendments.
DATES: Comments. Comments must be
received on or before October 2, 2023.
Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA), comments on the information
collection provisions are best assured of
consideration if the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)
receives a copy of your comments on or
before August 31, 2023.
Public hearing. The EPA does not
plan to conduct a public hearing unless
requested. If anyone contacts us
requesting a public hearing on or before
August 7, 2023, we will hold a virtual
public hearing. See SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION for information on
requesting and registering for a public
hearing.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
SUMMARY:
Comments. You may submit
comments, identified by Docket Id. No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234, by any of
the following methods:
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
Federal eRulemaking Portal.
www.regulations.gov (our preferred
method). Follow the online instructions
for submitting comments.
Mail: U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, EPA Docket Center, Air and
Radiation Docket, Mail Code 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20460.
Hand Delivery or Courier (by
scheduled appointment only): EPA
Docket Center, WJC West Building,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20004. The Docket
Center’s hours of operations are 8:30
a.m.–4:30 p.m., Monday-Friday (except
Federal holidays).
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the Docket Id. No. for this
proposed rulemaking. Comments
received may be posted without change
to www.regulations.gov/, including any
personal information provided. For
detailed instructions on sending
comments and additional information
on the rulemaking process, see the
‘‘Public Participation’’ heading of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
The virtual hearing, if requested, will
be held using an online meeting
platform, and the EPA will provide
information on its website
(www.epa.gov/ghgreporting) regarding
how to register and access the hearing.
Refer to the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section for additional information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jennifer Bohman, Climate Change
Division, Office of Atmospheric
Programs (MC–6207A), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number: (202) 343–9548;
email address: GHGReporting@epa.gov.
For technical information, please go to
the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program
(GHGRP) website, www.epa.gov/
ghgreporting. To submit a question,
select Help Center, followed by
‘‘Contact Us.’’
World Wide Web (WWW). In addition
to being available in the docket, an
electronic copy of this proposal will
also be available through the WWW.
Following the Administrator’s signature,
a copy of this proposed rule will be
posted on the EPA’s GHGRP website at
www.epa.gov/ghgreporting.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Written comments. Submit your
comments, identified by Docket Id. No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234, at
www.regulations.gov (our preferred
method), or the other methods
identified in the ADDRESSES section.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from the docket. The
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
EPA may publish any comment received
to its public docket. Do not submit to
the EPA’s docket at
www.regulations.gov any information
you consider to be confidential business
information (CBI), proprietary business
information (PBI), or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is
considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points
you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or
comment contents located outside of the
primary submission (i.e., on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system).
Commenters who would like the EPA to
further consider in this rulemaking any
relevant comments that they provided
on the 2022 Proposed Rule regarding
proposed revisions at issue in this
proposal must resubmit those comments
to the EPA during this proposal’s
comment period. Please visit
www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epadockets for additional submission
methods; the full EPA public comment
policy; information about CBI, PBI, or
multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective
comments.
Participation in virtual public
hearing. To request a virtual public
hearing, please contact the person listed
in the following FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section by August
7, 2023. If requested, the virtual hearing
will be held on August 21, 2023. The
EPA will provide further information
about the hearing on its website
(www.epa.gov/ghgreporting) if a hearing
is requested.
If a public hearing is requested, the
EPA will begin pre-registering speakers
for the hearing no later than one
business day after a request has been
received. To register to speak at the
virtual hearing, please use the online
registration form available at
www.epa.gov/ghgreporting or contact us
by email at GHGReporting@epa.gov. The
last day to pre-register to speak at the
hearing will be August 16, 2023. On
August 18, 2023, the EPA will post a
general agenda that will list preregistered speakers in approximate
order at: www.epa.gov/ghgreporting.
The EPA will make every effort to
follow the schedule as closely as
possible on the day of the hearing;
however, please plan for the hearings to
run either ahead of schedule or behind
schedule.
Each commenter will have 4 minutes
to provide oral testimony. The EPA
encourages commenters to provide the
EPA with a copy of their oral testimony
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
electronically (via email) by emailing it
to GHGReporting@epa.gov. The EPA
also recommends submitting the text of
your oral testimony as written
comments to the rulemaking docket.
The EPA may ask clarifying questions
during the oral presentations but will
not respond to the presentations at that
time. Written statements and supporting
information submitted during the
comment period will be considered
with the same weight as oral testimony
and supporting information presented at
the public hearing.
Please note that any updates made to
any aspect of the hearing will be posted
online at www.epa.gov/ghgreporting.
While the EPA expects the hearing to go
forward as set forth above, please
monitor our website or contact us by
email at GHGReporting@epa.gov to
determine if there are any updates. The
EPA does not intend to publish a
document in the Federal Register
announcing updates.
If you require the services of an
interpreter or special accommodation
such as audio description, please preregister for the hearing with the public
hearing team and describe your needs
by August 8, 2023. The EPA may not be
50283
able to arrange accommodations without
advanced notice.
Regulated entities. This is a proposed
regulation. If finalized, these proposed
revisions would affect certain entities
that must submit annual greenhouse gas
(GHG) reports under the GHGRP (40
CFR part 98). These are proposed
amendments to existing regulations. If
finalized, these amended regulations
would also affect owners or operators of
petroleum and natural gas systems that
directly emit GHGs. Regulated
categories and entities include, but are
not limited to, those listed in Table 1 of
this preamble:
TABLE 1—EXAMPLES OF AFFECTED ENTITIES BY CATEGORY
North American
Industry
Classification
System
(NAICS)
Category
Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems .......................................
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Table 1 of this preamble is not
intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide for readers regarding
facilities likely to be affected by this
proposed action. This table lists the
types of facilities that the EPA is now
aware could potentially be affected by
this action. Other types of facilities than
those listed in the table could also be
subject to reporting requirements. To
determine whether you would be
affected by this proposed action, you
should carefully examine the
applicability criteria found in 40 CFR
part 98, subpart A (General Provisions)
and 40 CFR part 98, subpart W
(Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems). If
you have questions regarding the
applicability of this action to a
particular facility, consult the person
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section.
Acronyms and Abbreviations. The
following acronyms and abbreviations
are used in this document.
AGR acid gas removal unit
AMLD Advanced Mobile Leak Detection
API American Petroleum Institute
ASTM American Society for Testing and
Materials
BOEM Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management
BRE Bryan Research & Engineering
Btu/scf British thermal units per standard
cubic foot
CAA Clean Air Act
CBI confidential business information
CEMS continuous emissions monitoring
system
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
486210
221210
211120
211130
Examples of affected facilities
Pipeline transportation of natural gas.
Natural gas distribution facilities.
Crude petroleum extraction.
Natural gas extraction.
CenSARA Central States Air Resources
Agency
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CH4 methane
CO2 carbon dioxide
CO2e carbon dioxide equivalent
CRR cost-to-revenue ratio
e-GGRT electronic Greenhouse Gas
Reporting Tool
EG emission guidelines
EIA U.S. Energy Information
Administration
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ET Eastern time
FAQ frequently asked question
FLIGHT Facility Level Information on
Greenhouse gases Tool
FR Federal Register
GHG greenhouse gas
GHGRP Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program
GOR gas to oil ratio
gpm gallons per minute
GRI Gas Research Institute
GT gas turbines
HHV higher heating value
ICR Information Collection Request
ID identification
IRA Inflation Reduction Act of 2022
ISBN International Standard Book Number
IVT Inputs Verification Tool
kg/hr kilograms per hour
LDC local distribution company
LNG liquefied natural gas
m meters
MDEA methyl diethanolamine
MEA monoethanolamine
MMBtu/hr million British thermal units per
hour
MMscf million standard cubic feet
mt metric tons
mtCO2e metric tons carbon dioxide
equivalent
N2O nitrous oxide
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
NAICS North American Industry
Classification System
NGLs natural gas liquids
NMAC New Mexico Administrative Code
NSPS new source performance standards
O&M operation and maintenance
OCS AQS Outer Continental Shelf Air
Quality System
OEM original equipment manufacturer
OGI optical gas imaging
OMB Office of Management and Budget
PBI proprietary business information
ppm parts per million
ppmv parts per million by volume
PRA Paperwork Reduction Act
psig pounds per square inch gauge
REC reduced emission completion
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
RFI Request for Information
RICE reciprocating internal combustion
engines
RY reporting year
scf standard cubic feet
scf/hr/device standard cubic feet per hour
per device
THC total hydrocarbon
TSD technical support document
U.S. United States
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995
VOC volatile organic compound(s)
WWW World Wide Web
Contents
I. Background
A. How is this preamble organized?
B. Executive Summary
C. Background on This Proposed Rule
D. Legal Authority
E. Relationship to Other Clean Air Act
Section 136 Actions
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50284
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
II. Overview and Rationale for Proposed
Amendments to 40 CFR Part 98, subpart
W
A. Revisions To Address Potential Gaps in
Reporting of Emissions Data for Specific
Sectors
B. Revisions To Add New Emissions
Calculation Methodologies or Improve
Existing Emissions Calculation
Methodologies
C. Revisions To Reporting Requirements to
Improve Verification and Transparency
of the Data Collected
D. Technical Amendments, Clarifications,
and Corrections
III. Proposed Amendments to Part 98
A. General and Applicability Amendments
B. Other Large Release Events
C. New and Additional Emission Sources
D. Reporting for the Onshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Production and Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting Industry Segments
E. Natural Gas Pneumatic Device Venting
and Natural Gas Driven Pneumatic Pump
Venting
F. Acid Gas Removal Unit Vents
G. Dehydrator Vents
H. Liquids Unloading
I. Gas Well Completions and Workovers
With Hydraulic Fracturing
J. Blowdown Vent Stacks
K. Atmospheric Storage Tanks
L. Flared Transmission Storage Tank Vent
Emissions
M. Associated Gas Venting and Flaring
N. Flare Stack Emissions
O. Compressors
P. Equipment Leak Surveys
Q. Equipment Leaks by Population Count
R. Offshore Production
S. Combustion Equipment
T. Leak Detection and Measurement
Methods
U. Industry Segment-Specific Throughput
Quantity Reporting
V. Other Proposed Minor Revisions or
Clarifications
IV. Schedule for the Proposed Amendments
V. Proposed Confidentiality Determinations
for Certain Data Reporting Elements
A. Overview and Background
B. Proposed Confidentiality
Determinations
C. Proposed Reporting Determinations for
Inputs to Emissions Equations
D. Request for Comments on Proposed
Category Assignments, Confidentiality
Determinations, or Reporting
Determinations
VI. Impacts of the Proposed Amendments
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions
To Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
K. Determination Under CAA Section
307(d)
I. Background
A. How is this preamble organized?
The first section of this preamble
contains background information
regarding the proposed amendments.
This section also discusses the EPA’s
legal authority under the Clean Air Act
(CAA) to promulgate (including
subsequent amendments to) the
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule,
codified at 40 CFR part 98 (hereafter
referred to as ‘‘part 98’’), generally and
40 CFR part 98, subpart W (hereafter
referred to as ‘‘subpart W’’) in
particular. This section also discusses
the EPA’s legal authority to make
confidentiality determinations for new
or revised data elements required by
these amendments or for existing data
elements for which a confidentiality
determination has not previously been
proposed. Section II of this preamble
describes the types of amendments
included in this proposed rulemaking
and includes the rationale for each type
of proposed change. Section III of this
preamble contains detailed information
on the proposed revisions to 40 CFR
part 98, subpart A (General Provisions),
subpart C (General Stationary Fuel
Combustion Sources) and subpart W.
Section IV of this preamble discusses
when the proposed revisions to part 98
would apply to reporters. Section V of
this preamble discusses the proposed
confidentiality determinations for new
or substantially revised data reporting
elements (i.e., requiring additional or
different data to be reported), as well as
for certain existing data elements for
which a determination has not been
previously established. Section VI of
this preamble discusses the impacts of
the proposed amendments. Section VII
of this preamble describes the statutory
and Executive order requirements
applicable to this action.
B. Executive Summary
In August 2022, Congress passed, and
President Biden signed, the Inflation
Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA) into law.
Section 60113 of the IRA amended the
CAA by adding section 136, ‘‘Methane
Emissions and Waste Reduction
Incentive Program for Petroleum and
Natural Gas Systems.’’ CAA section
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
136(c), ‘‘Waste Emissions Charge,’’
directs the Administrator to impose and
collect a charge on methane (CH4)
emissions that exceed statutorily
specified waste emissions thresholds
from an owner or operator of an
applicable facility that reports more
than 25,000 metric tons carbon dioxide
equivalent (mtCO2e) pursuant to the
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule’s
requirements for the petroleum and
natural gas systems source category
(codified as subpart W in EPA’s
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule
regulations). Further, CAA section
136(h) requires that the EPA shall,
within two years after the date of
enactment of section 60113 of the IRA,
revise the requirements of subpart W to
ensure the reporting under subpart W
(and corresponding waste emissions
charges under CAA section 136) is
based on empirical data, accurately
reflects the total CH4 emissions (and
waste emissions) from the applicable
facilities, and allow owners and
operators of applicable facilities to
submit empirical emissions data, in a
manner to be prescribed by the
Administrator, to demonstrate the
extent to which a charge is owed under
CAA section 136.
In this action, the EPA is proposing
revisions to subpart W consistent with
the authority and directives set forth in
CAA section 136(h) as well as the EPA’s
authority under CAA section 114. The
EPA is proposing revisions to include
reporting of additional emissions or
emissions sources to address potential
gaps in the total CH4 emissions reported
by facilities to subpart W. These
revisions include proposing to add a
new emissions source, referred to as
‘‘other large release events,’’ to capture
large emission events that are not
accurately accounted for using existing
methods in subpart W. Other new
sources proposed to be added or
included in revised existing sources
include nitrogen removal units,
produced water tanks, mud degassing,
crankcase venting and combustion slip.
The EPA is also proposing several
revisions to add new or revise existing
calculation methodologies to improve
the accuracy of reported emissions,
incorporate additional empirical data
and to allow owners and operators of
applicable facilities to submit empirical
emissions data that could appropriately
demonstrate the extent to which a
charge is owed in future
implementation of CAA section 136, as
directed by CAA section 136(h). For
example, the EPA is proposing new
calculation methodologies for
equipment leaks and natural gas
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
pneumatic devices to allow for the use
of direct measurement. The EPA is also
proposing several revisions to existing
reporting requirements to collect data
that would improve verification of
reported data, ensure accurate reporting
of emissions, and improve the
transparency of reported data. For
example, the EPA is proposing to
disaggregate reporting requirements
within the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production and Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting industry segments, with
most emissions and activity data for
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production and Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
being disaggregated to at least the wellpad and site-level, respectively. The
EPA is also proposing other technical
amendments, corrections, and
clarifications that would improve
understanding of the rule. These
revisions primarily include revisions of
requirements to better reflect the EPA’s
intent or editorial changes. The
proposed revisions under this
rulemaking are described in further
detail in sections II and III of this
preamble. The EPA will be undertaking
one or more separate actions in the
future to implement the remainder of
CAA section 136.
C. Background on This Proposed Rule
This proposed action builds on
previous Greenhouse Gas reporting
rulemakings. The Greenhouse Gas
Reporting Rule was published in the
Federal Register (FR) on October 30,
2009 (74 FR 56260) (hereafter referred to
as the 2009 Final Rule). The 2009 Final
Rule became effective on December 29,
2009, and requires reporting of GHGs
from various facilities and suppliers,
consistent with the 2008 Consolidated
Appropriations Act.1 Although
reporting requirements for petroleum
and natural gas systems were originally
proposed to be part of part 98 (75 FR
16448, April 10, 2009), the final October
2009 rulemaking did not include the
petroleum and natural gas systems
source category as one of the 29 source
categories for which reporting
requirements were finalized. The EPA
re-proposed subpart W in 2010 (75 FR
18608; April 12, 2010), and a
subsequent final rulemaking was
published on November 30, 2010, with
the requirements for the petroleum and
natural gas systems source category at
40 CFR part 98, subpart W (75 FR
74458) (hereafter referred to as the
‘‘2010 Final Rule’’). Following
1 Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008, Public
Law 110–161, 121 Stat. 1844, 2128.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
promulgation, the EPA finalized several
technical and clarifying amendments to
subpart W (76 FR 22825, April 25, 2011;
76 FR 53057, August 25, 2011; 76 FR
59533, September 27, 2011; 76 FR
73866, November 29, 2011; 76 FR
80554, December 23, 2011; 77 FR 48072,
August 13, 2012; 77 FR 51477, August
24, 2012; 78 FR 25392, May 1, 2013; 78
FR 71904, November 29, 2013; 79 FR
63750, October 24, 2014; 79 FR 70352,
November 25, 2014; 80 FR 64262,
October 22, 2015; and 81 FR 86490,
November 30, 2016). These amendments
generally added or revised requirements
in subpart W, including revisions that
were intended to improve quality,
clarity, and consistency across the
calculation, monitoring, and data
reporting requirements, and to finalize
confidentiality and reporting
determinations for data elements
reported under the subpart.
More recently, the EPA proposed
amendments to subpart W on June 21,
2022 (87 FR 36920) (hereafter referred to
as the ‘‘2022 Proposed Rule’’), including
technical amendments to improve the
quality and consistency of the data
collected under the rule and resolve
data gaps, amendments to streamline
and improve implementation, and
revisions to provide additional
flexibility in the calculation methods
and monitoring requirements for some
emission sources. The 2022 Proposed
Rule was developed prior to the
enactment of the IRA and its direction
in CAA section 136(h) to revise subpart
W. Consequently, in developing this
current proposed action, the EPA
considered the proposed amendments to
subpart W from the 2022 Proposed Rule
as well as the concerns and information
submitted by commenters in response to
that proposal. In this proposal, the EPA
is again proposing to revise the subpart
W provisions, and our proposed
revisions include both (1) updates to the
proposed revisions to subpart W that
were in the 2022 Proposed Rule as well
as (2) additional proposed revisions to
comply with CAA section 136(h). The
EPA accordingly does not intend to
finalize the revisions to subpart W that
were proposed in the 2022 Proposed
Rule in the final version of that rule.
Commenters who would like the EPA to
further consider in this rulemaking any
relevant comments that they provided
on the 2022 Proposed Rule regarding its
proposed revisions to subpart W must
resubmit those comments to the EPA
during this proposal’s comment period.
Additionally, the EPA opened a nonregulatory docket on November 4, 2022,
and issued a Request for Information
(RFI) seeking public input to inform
program design related to CAA section
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50285
136.2 As part of this request, the EPA
sought input on revisions that should be
considered related to subpart W. The
comment period closed on January 18,
2023.
The EPA also recently issued a
supplemental proposal to the 2022
Proposed Rule (88 FR 32852, May 22,
2023), which included proposed
updates to the General Provisions of the
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule to
reflect revised global warming
potentials, proposed reporting of GHG
data from additional sectors (i.e., nonsubpart W sectors), and proposed
revisions to source categories other than
subpart W that would improve
implementation of the Greenhouse Gas
Reporting Rule. These proposed
revisions are being undertaken in a
separate action. Accordingly, the EPA
considers comments related to that
action to be outside the scope of this
proposed rule.
D. Legal Authority
The EPA is proposing these rule
amendments under its existing CAA
authority provided in CAA section 114
and under its newly established
authority provided in CAA section 136,
as applicable. As stated in the preamble
to the 2009 Final Rule, CAA section
114(a)(1) provides the EPA broad
authority to require the information
proposed to be gathered by this rule
because such data would inform and are
relevant to the EPA’s carrying out of a
variety of CAA provisions. See the
preambles to the proposed Greenhouse
Gas Reporting Rule (74 FR 16448, April
10, 2009) and the 2009 Final Rule for
further information. As noted in section
I.B of this preamble, the IRA added CAA
section 136, ‘‘Methane Emissions and
Waste Reduction Incentive Program for
Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems,’’
which requires revisions to the
requirements of subpart W to ensure
that reporting of CH4emissions under
subpart W (and corresponding waste
emissions charges under CAA section
136) is based on empirical data,
accurately reflects the total CH4
emissions (and waste emissions) from
applicable facilities, and allows owners
and operators to submit empirical
emissions data, in a manner prescribed
by the Administrator, to demonstrate
the extent to which a charge is owed
under CAA section 136. Under CAA
section 136, an ‘‘applicable facility’’ is
a facility within nine of the ten industry
segments subject to subpart W, as
currently defined in 40 CFR 98.230
(excluding natural gas distribution).
2 Docket
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0875.
01AUP2
50286
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
The Administrator has determined
that this action is subject to the
provisions of section 307(d) of the CAA.
Section 307(d) contains a set of
procedures relating to the issuance and
review of certain CAA rules.
In addition, pursuant to sections 114,
301, and 307 of the CAA, the EPA is
publishing proposed confidentiality
determinations for the new or
substantially revised data elements
required by these proposed
amendments. Section 114(c) requires
that the EPA make information obtained
under section 114 available to the
public, except for information
(excluding emission data) that qualifies
for confidential treatment.
E. Relationship to Other Clean Air Act
Section 136 Actions
The IRA adds authorities under CAA
section 136 to reduce CH4 emissions
from the oil and gas sector. It
accomplishes this in multiple ways.
First, it provides incentives for CH4
mitigation and monitoring. Second, it
establishes a waste emissions charge for
applicable facilities that exceed
statutorily-specified thresholds that vary
by industry segment and are determined
by the amount of natural gas or oil sent
to sale. Third, CAA section 136(h)
requires the EPA to revise subpart W.
The first and second listed aspects of
CAA section 136 are outside the scope
of this rulemaking.
CAA section 136 provides $1.55
billion in incentives for CH4 mitigation
and monitoring, including through
grants, rebates, contracts, loans, and
other activities. Of these funds, at least
$700 million is allocated to activities at
marginal conventional wells. There are
several potential uses of funds. Use of
funds can include financial and
technical assistance to owners and
operators of applicable facilities to
prepare and submit GHG reports under
subpart W. Financial assistance can also
be provided for CH4 emissions
monitoring authorized under CAA
section 103 subsections (a) through (c).
Additionally, financial and technical
assistance can be provided to: reduce
CH4 and other GHG emissions from
petroleum and natural gas systems,
including to mitigate legacy air
pollution from petroleum and natural
gas systems; improve climate resilience
of communities and petroleum and
natural gas systems; improve and
deploy industrial equipment and
processes that reduce CH4 and other
GHG emissions and waste; support
innovation in reducing CH4 and other
GHG emissions and waste from
petroleum and natural gas systems;
permanently shut in and plug wells on
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
non-Federal land; and mitigate health
effects of CH4 and other GHG emissions
and legacy air pollution from petroleum
and natural gas systems in low-income
and disadvantaged communities, and
support environmental restoration.
The EPA has provided initial public
engagement and input opportunities
related to the design and
implementation of these incentives.
This has included issuing an RFI 3 to
inform program design and listening
sessions to enable input directly to the
EPA. Through these engagement
opportunities, the EPA has heard a
number of common themes. First, the
EPA has received input that the EPA
should use funding mechanisms for
rapid distribution of incentives. Second,
the EPA has heard about the need for
addressing critical gaps and key
opportunities to achieve maximum
impact. Third, the EPA has received
input about the need to address
cumulative pollution for overburdened
communities.
The EPA is moving expeditiously to
implement the incentives for CH4
mitigation and monitoring and
anticipates making announcements
regarding next steps; however, as noted,
those steps are outside the scope of this
rulemaking.
CAA section 136(c) provides that the
Administrator shall impose and collect
a charge on CH4 emissions that exceed
an applicable waste emissions threshold
under CAA section 136(f) from an
owner or operator of an applicable
facility that reports more than 25,000
mtCO2e per year pursuant to subpart W.
CAA section 136 provides various
flexibilities and exemptions relating to
the waste emissions charge. The EPA
intends to undertake one or more
separate actions in the future to
implement the waste emissions charge
and intends to provide an opportunity
for public comment in those actions;
therefore, as noted, implementation of
the waste emissions charge is outside
the scope of this rulemaking.
As noted earlier, CAA section 136(h)
requires revisions to subpart W. The
purpose of this proposed action is to
meet directives set forth in CAA section
136(h).
II. Overview and Rationale for
Proposed Amendments to 40 CFR Part
98, Subpart W
As discussed in section I of this
preamble, in August 2022, Congress
passed, and President Biden signed, the
IRA into law. Section 60113 of the IRA
amended the CAA by adding section
136, ‘‘Methane Emissions and Waste
PO 00000
3 Docket
ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2022–0875.
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Reduction Incentive Program for
Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems.’’
CAA section 136(h) requires that the
EPA shall, within two years of the
enactment of that section of the IRA,
revise the requirements of subpart W to
ensure the reporting under that subpart
and calculation of charges under CAA
section 136(e) and (f) are based on
empirical data, accurately reflect the
total CH4 emissions and waste
emissions from the applicable facilities,
and allow owners and operators of
applicable facilities to submit empirical
emissions data, in a manner prescribed
by the Administrator, to demonstrate
the extent to which a charge is owed.
CAA section 136(d) defines the term
‘‘applicable facility’’ as a facility within
the following industry segments as
defined in subpart W: offshore
petroleum and natural gas production,
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production, onshore natural gas
processing, onshore gas transmission
compression, underground natural gas
storage, liquefied natural gas storage,
liquefied natural gas import and export
equipment, onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting, and
onshore natural gas transmission
pipeline.
Empirical data can be defined as data
that are collected by observation and
experiment. There are many forms of
empirical data that can be used to
quantify GHG emissions. For purposes
of this action, the EPA interprets
empirical data to mean data that are
collected by conducting observations
and experiments that could be used to
accurately calculate emissions at a
facility, including direct emissions
measurements, monitoring of CH4
emissions (e.g., leak surveys) or
measurement of associated parameters
(e.g., flow rate, pressure, etc.), and
published data. The EPA reviewed
available empirical data methods for
accuracy and appropriateness for
calculating annual unit or facility-level
GHG emissions. The review included
both the evaluation of technologies and
methodologies already incorporated in
subpart W for measuring and reporting
annual source- and facility-level GHG
emissions and the evaluation of the
accuracy of potential alternative
technologies and methodologies, with a
focus on CH4 emissions due to the
directive in CAA section 136(h).
Currently, subpart W specifies
emission source types to be reported for
each industry segment and provides
methodologies to calculate emissions
from each source type, which are then
summed to generate the total subpart W
emissions for the facility. Current
calculation methods can be grouped
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
into five categories: (1) direct emissions
measurement; (2) combination of
measurement and engineering
calculations; (3) engineering
calculations; (4) leak detection and use
of a leaker emission factor; and (5)
population count and population
emission factors. Subpart W emission
factors (both population and leaker
emission factors) include both those
developed from published empirical
data and those developed from sitespecific data collected by the reporting
facility. The EPA developed the current
subpart W monitoring and reporting
requirements to use the most
appropriate monitoring and calculation
methods, considering both the accuracy
of the emissions calculated by the
proposed method and the size of the
emission source based on the methods
and data available at the time of the
applicable rule promulgation.
Considering the directives set forth in
CAA section 136, the EPA re-evaluated
the existing methodologies to determine
if they are likely to accurately reflect
CH4 and waste emissions at an
individual facility, whether the existing
methodologies used empirical data, and
whether the existing methodologies
should be modified or replaced to meet
CAA section 136 directives. In cases
where source-level emissions were
determined to be highly variable, not
well characterized by an available
method in subpart W, and a more
accurate method, such as direct
emissions measurement, is available,
the EPA is proposing to update
reporting requirements to reflect only
methodologies that have been
determined to likely accurately
characterize unit or facility-level
emissions. For example, intermittent
bleed pneumatic devices are designed to
vent during actuation only, but these
devices are known to often malfunction
and operate incorrectly which causes
them to release gas to the atmosphere
when idle, leading to high degree of
variance in emissions from pneumatic
devices between facilities (see
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule:
Technical Support for Revisions and
Confidentiality Determinations for Data
Elements Under the Greenhouse Gas
Reporting Rule; Proposed Rule—
Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems,
hereafter referred to as the ‘‘subpart W
TSD,’’ available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2023–0234, for more information).
The EPA welcomes comments on all
aspects of this technical support
document. Even in cases where the EPA
considers an existing method that is not
based on direct measurement or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
emission monitoring provides a
reasonably accurate calculation of
emissions for a facility, we also
reviewed whether a direct emission
measurement or emission monitoring
method could be added to subpart W, if
one was not already available, to give
owners and operators the opportunity to
submit empirical data. The EPA also
evaluated whether there were gaps in
the emission source types reporting CH4
emissions under subpart W and whether
there were methodologies available to
calculate those emissions.
The proposed amendments include:
• Revisions to expand reporting to
include new emission sources, in order
to accurately reflect total CH4 emissions
reported to the GHGRP.
• Revisions to add emissions
calculation methodologies to
incorporate additional empirical data
and improve the accuracy of reported
emission data.
• Revisions to refine existing
emissions calculation methodologies to
reflect an improved understanding of
emissions or to incorporate more recent
research on GHG emissions to improve
the accuracy of reported emission data.
• Revisions to remove calculation
methodologies in cases where it was
determined that more accurate
calculation methodologies were
available.
The EPA has also identified
additional areas where revisions to part
98 would improve the EPA’s ability to
verify the accuracy of reported
emissions and improve data
transparency and alignment with other
EPA programs and regulations. The EPA
also identified areas where additional
data or revised data elements may be
necessary for future implementation of
the waste emissions charge under CAA
section 136. The proposed revisions
include:
• Revisions to report emissions from
facilities in the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production and Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting industry segments at the
site level instead of at the basin level,
sub-basin level, or county level.
• Addition of data elements related to
emissions from plugged wells.
• Addition or clarification of
throughput-related data elements for
subpart W industry segments.
• Revisions to data elements or
recordkeeping where the current
requirements are redundant or
alternative data would be more
appropriate for verification of emission
data.
• Revisions that provide additional
information for reporters to better or
more fully understand their compliance
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50287
obligations, revisions that emphasize
the EPA’s intent for requirements that
reporters appear to have previously
misinterpreted to ensure that accurate
data are being collected, and editorial
corrections or harmonizing changes that
would improve the public’s
understanding of the rule.
Sections II.A through II.D of this
preamble describe the above changes in
more detail and provide the EPA’s
rationale for the changes included in
each category. Additional details for the
specific amendments proposed for each
subpart are included in section III of
this preamble. We are seeking public
comment only on the proposed
revisions and issues specifically
identified in this document for the
identified subparts. We expect to deem
any comments received addressing
other aspects of 40 CFR part 98 or other
rulemakings to be outside of the scope
of this proposed rulemaking.
In addition, on November 15, 2021
(86 FR 63110), the EPA proposed under
CAA section 111(b) standards of
performance for certain new,
reconstructed, and modified oil and
natural gas sources (40 CFR part 60,
subpart OOOOb) (hereafter referred to as
‘‘NSPS OOOOb’’), as well as emissions
guidelines under CAA section 111(d) for
certain existing oil and natural gas
sources (40 CFR part 60, subpart
OOOOc) (hereafter referred to as ‘‘EG
OOOOc’’) (the sources affected by these
two proposed subparts are collectively
referred to in this preamble as ‘‘affected
sources’’). On December 6, 2022, the
EPA issued a supplemental proposal to
update, strengthen and expand the
standards proposed on November 15,
2021 (87 FR 74702). While the standards
in proposed NSPS OOOOb would
directly apply to new, reconstructed,
and modified sources when finalized,
the final EG OOOOc would not impose
binding requirements directly on
sources; rather it would contain
guidelines, including presumptive
standards, for states to follow in
developing, submitting, and
implementing plans to establish
standards of performance to limit GHGs
(in the form of CH4 limitations) from
existing oil and gas sources within their
own states. If a state does not submit a
plan to the EPA for approval in response
to the final emission guidelines, or if the
EPA disapproves a state’s plan, then the
EPA must establish a Federal plan. In
addition, a Federal plan could apply to
sources located on Tribal lands where
the tribe does not request approval to
develop a tribal implementation plan
similar to a state plan. Once the
Administrator approves a state plan
under CAA section 111(d), the plan is
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50288
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
codified in 40 CFR part 62 (Approval
and Promulgation of State Plans for
Designated Facilities and Pollutants)
within the relevant subpart for that
state.4 40 CFR part 62 also includes all
Federal plans promulgated pursuant to
CAA section 111(d). Therefore, rather
than referencing the presumptive
standards in EG OOOOc, which would
not directly apply to sources, the
proposed amendments to subpart W
reference 40 CFR part 62.
Similar to the 2016 amendments to
align subpart W requirements with
certain requirements in 40 CFR part 60,
subpart OOOOa (hereafter referred to as
‘‘NSPS OOOOa’’) (81 FR 86500,
November 30, 2016), we are proposing
revisions to certain requirements in
subpart W relative to the requirements
proposed for NSPS OOOOb and the
presumptive standards proposed in EG
OOOOc (which would inform the
standards to be developed and codified
at 40 CFR part 62). As in the 2016 rule,
the proposed amendments would also
allow facilities to use a consistent
method to demonstrate compliance with
multiple EPA programs. This proposal
would limit burden for subpart W
facilities with affected sources that
would also be required to comply with
the proposed NSPS OOOOb or a State
or Federal plan in part 62 implementing
EG OOOOc by allowing them to use
data derived from the implementation of
the NSPS OOOOb to calculate emissions
for the GHGRP rather than requiring the
use of different monitoring methods.
Consistent with that goal, the EPA
expects that the final amendments to
subpart W would reference the final
version of the method(s) in the NSPS
OOOOb and EG OOOOc. These
amendments would also improve the
emission calculations reported under
the GHGRP. Specifically, we are
proposing amendments to the subpart W
calculation methodologies for flares,
centrifugal and reciprocating
compressors, and equipment leak
surveys related to the proposed NSPS
OOOOb and presumptive standards in
EG OOOOc, and we are proposing new
reporting requirements for ‘‘other large
release events’’ as defined in subpart W
that would reference the NSPS OOOOb
and approved state plans or applicable
Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62. These
proposed amendments are described in
sections III.B, N, O, and P. If finalized,
the provisions of these proposed
amendments that reference the NSPS
OOOOb and approved state plans or
4 40 CFR part 62 contains a subpart for each of
the 50 states, District of Columbia, American
Samoa, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands, and Northern
Mariana Islands.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part
62 would not apply to individual
reporters unless and until their emission
sources are required to comply with
either the final NSPS OOOOb or an
approved state plan or applicable
Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62. In the
meantime, reporters would have the
option to comply with the calculation
methodologies that would be required
for sources subject to NSPS OOOOb or
40 CFR part 62, or they would comply
instead with the applicable provisions
of subpart W that apply to sources not
subject to NSPS OOOOb or 40 CFR part
62. For example, for flare sources
subject to NSPS OOOOb, facilities
would have the option to comply with
the flare monitoring requirements in
NSPS OOOOb even if the source is not
yet subject to or will not be subject to
those provisions. For the ‘‘other large
release events’’ source category,
emissions from other large release
events would be required to be
calculated and reported starting in
Reporting Year (RY) 2025; the
requirements to calculate and report
these emissions is not dependent on
whether a source is subject to NSPS
OOOOb or 40 CFR part 62.
The specific changes that we are
proposing, as described in this section,
are described in detail in section III of
this preamble.
A. Revisions To Address Potential Gaps
in Reporting of Emissions Data for
Specific Sectors
We are proposing several
amendments to include reporting of
additional emissions or emissions
sources to address potential gaps in the
total CH4 emissions reported per facility
to subpart W. In particular, based on
recent analyses such as those conducted
for the annual Inventory of U.S.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks
(U.S. GHG Inventory), and data newly
available from atmospheric
observations, we have become aware of
potentially significant sources of
emissions for which there are no current
emission estimation methods or
reporting requirements within part 98.
For subpart W, we are proposing to add
calculation methodologies and
requirements to report GHG emissions
for several additional sources. We are
proposing to add a new emissions
source, referred to as ‘‘other large
release events,’’ to capture abnormal
emission events that are not accurately
accounted for using existing methods in
subpart W. This additional source
would cover events such as storage
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
wellhead leaks, well blowouts,5 and
other large, atypical release events and
would apply to all types of facilities
subject to subpart W. Reporters would
calculate GHG emissions using
measurement data or engineering
estimates of the amount of gas released
and measurement data, if available, or
process knowledge (best available data)
to estimate the composition of the
released gas. We are also proposing to
add calculation methodologies and
requirements to report GHG emissions
for several other new emission sources,
including nitrogen removal units,
produced water tanks, mud degassing
and crankcase venting. None of these
sources are currently accounted for in
subpart W, and the EPA is proposing to
include them because they are likely to
have a meaningful impact on reported
CH4 emissions. We are also proposing
to revise the existing methodologies and
add new measurement-based
methodologies, consistent with section
II.B., for determining combustion
emissions from reciprocating internal
combustion engines (RICE) and gas
turbines (GT), including those that drive
compressors, to account for combustion
slip, which is not currently accounted
for under the existing calculation
methodologies for combustion
emissions. We are also proposing to
require reporting of existing emission
sources by additional industry
segments. For example, we are
proposing to require liquefied natural
gas (LNG) import/export facilities to
begin calculating and reporting
emissions from acid gas removal unit
(AGR) vents. Additional details of these
types of proposed changes may be found
in section III of this preamble.
The proposed changes would ensure
that the reporting under subpart W
accurately reflects the total CH4
emissions and waste emissions as
required by CAA section 136(h).
B. Revisions To Add New Emissions
Calculation Methodologies or Improve
Existing Emissions Calculation
Methodologies
We are proposing several revisions to
add new or revise existing calculation
methodologies to improve the accuracy
of emissions data reported to the
GHGRP, incorporate additional
empirical data and to allow owners and
operators of applicable facilities to
submit empirical emissions data that
appropriately could demonstrate the
extent to which a charge is owed in
5 We are proposing to define a well blowout in
40 CFR 98.238 as a complete loss of well control
for a long duration of time resulting in an emissions
release.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
future implementation of CAA section
136, as directed by CAA section 136(h).
Currently, subpart W specifies emission
source types to be reported for each
industry segment and provides
methodologies to calculate emissions
from each source type, which are then
summed to generate the total subpart W
emissions for the facility. Considering
the directives set forth in CAA section
136, the EPA re-evaluated the existing
methodologies for each source to
determine if they are likely to accurately
reflect CH4 and waste emissions at an
individual facility, whether the existing
methodologies used empirical data, e.g.,
direct emissions measurements or
monitoring of CH4 emissions or
measurement of associated parameters,
and whether the existing methodologies
should be modified or replaced to meet
CAA section 136 directives. A summary
list of the emissions sources proposed to
be reported with the corresponding
proposed monitoring and emissions
calculation methods is available in the
subpart W TSD, available in the docket
for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234. Many
sources in subpart W already have or
require calculation methodologies that
use direct emission measurement
including AGR vents, large
reciprocating compressor rod packing
vents, large compressor blowdown vent
valve leaks, and large compressor
blowdown vent (unit isolation valve
leaks), the latter two when leakage is
detected via screening. Currently,
subpart W has required direct
measurement when the magnitude of
emissions are potentially large and no
credible engineering calculation
methods or emission factors existed to
accurately characterize emissions. In
this proposal, the EPA is proposing new
calculation methodologies to allow for
the use of direct measurement,
including for equipment leaks and
natural gas pneumatic devices. The EPA
is also proposing new calculation
methodologies to allow for the
development of site-specific emission
factors for equipment leaks and
pneumatic devices based on data
collected from direct measurement at
the facility.
We are proposing several revisions to
modify calculation equations to
incorporate refinements to
methodologies based on an improved
understanding of emission sources. In
some cases, we have become aware of
discrepancies between assumptions in
the current emission estimation
methods and the processes or activities
conducted at specific facilities, where
the proposed revisions would reduce
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
reporter errors. In other cases, we are
proposing to revise the emissions
estimation methodologies to incorporate
recent studies on GHG emissions or
formation that reflect updates to
scientific understanding of GHG
emissions sources. The proposed
changes would improve the quality and
accuracy of the data collected under the
GHGRP.
We are also proposing to revise
several existing calculation
methodologies to incorporate empirical
data obtained at the facility. Emissions
can be reliably calculated for sources
such as tanks and glycol dehydrators
using standard engineering first
principle methods such as those
available in API 4697 E&P Tanks 6 and
GRI–GLYCalcTM.7 Using such software
also addresses safety concerns that are
associated with direct emissions
measurement from these sources. For
example, sometimes the temperature of
the emissions stream for glycol
dehydrator vent stacks is too high for
operators to safely measure emissions.
However, currently in subpart W, these
methods allow for use of best available
data for inputs to the model. The EPA
has noted that in some cases, such as
with reporting of emissions from some
dehydrators, the data used to calculate
emissions are not based on actual
operating conditions but instead based
on ‘‘worst-case scenarios’’ or other
estimates. In these cases, the accuracy of
the reported emissions would be
improved by using actual operating
conditions as measured at the unit. In
this proposal, for large glycol
dehydrators and AGRs, we are
proposing to require that certain input
parameters are based on actual
measurements at the unit level in order
to improve the accuracy of the reported
emissions for these sources.
In order to improve the accuracy of
the data collected under the GHGRP, we
are proposing to revise emission factors
where improved measurement data has
become available or we have received
additional information from
stakeholders. Some of the calculation
methodologies provided in the GHGRP
rely on the use of emission factors that
are based on published empirical data.
The use of default emission factors
decreases the need for additional
monitoring or measurements from
individual facilities, while in many
cases still providing a reasonably
accurate estimate of facility-level
6 E&P Tanks v3.0 software and the user guide
(Publication 4697) formerly available from the
American Petroleum Institute (API) website.
7 GRI–GLYCalcTM software available from Gas
Technology Institute website (https://
sales.gastechnology.org/).
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50289
emissions. The proposed rule includes
revisions to emission factors for a
number of emission source types, where
we have received or identified updated
measurement data. In cases where there
is significant variability in source-level
emissions and the default emission
factors are thus not appropriately
representative of facility-level
emissions, and other calculation
methodologies are available that are
representative of facility-level
emissions, we are proposing to remove
default emission factors. For example,
for intermittent bleed pneumatics, we
are proposing three new methodologies
for measuring emissions and are
therefore proposing to remove use of
default population emission factors for
calculating emissions.
We are proposing to update the
emission factors for continuous low and
high bleed natural gas pneumatic
devices and for equipment leaks from
natural gas distribution sources
(including pipeline mains and services,
below grade transmission-distribution
transfer stations, and below grade
metering-regulating stations) and
equipment at onshore petroleum and
natural gas production and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities in subpart W. The
proposed emission factors are more
representative of GHG emissions
sources and would improve the overall
accuracy of the emission data collected
under the GHGRP. Additional details of
these types of proposed changes may be
found in section III of this preamble.
In addition to the methods discussed
above, we reviewed measurement
approaches that utilize information from
satellite, aerial, and continuous
monitoring (‘‘top-down approaches’’) to
detect and/or quantify emissions from
petroleum and natural gas systems for
the purposes of subpart W reporting.
Top-down technologies have been a
focus for research and emission
monitoring strategies, and the
technologies have progressed in recent
years to provide reliable CH4 emission
monitoring and quantification in many
cases. Top-down technologies include
instruments located on satellites,
aircraft, and mobile platforms. These
technologies can also include Advanced
Mobile Leak Detection (AMLD) and
other continuous monitoring sensors.
Top-down approaches have certain
benefits related to geographic coverage,
repeatability, and periodic
measurements. Depending on the
technology (satellite, aircraft, drone), the
scale of observation can provide data
useful for quantifying emissions in a
range of cases, from quantifying
emissions for a single point source, such
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50290
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
as a wellhead, to a basin-wide
measurement. This data can be used to
develop emissions estimates for the
duration of the observation or can be
used in combination with additional
observations or other data inputs to
estimate emissions from a longer time
frame. Satellite remote sensing
technologies currently take
measurements of concentrations at
altitudes of 400 to 800 kilometers with
CH4 detection limits of approximately
50 to 25,000 kilograms per hour (kg/
hr),8 with one system citing 2 parts per
billion (ppb); 9 high altitude remote
sensing (by airplane) measure at
altitudes of 168 to 12,000 meters (m)
with CH4 detection limits of
approximately 1 to 50 kg/hr; 10 and low
altitude aerial remote sensing (by drone)
take measurements at altitudes of 30 to
150 m with CH4 detection ranging from
approximately 5 to 250 parts per million
(ppm) (depending on distance).11 12 For
8 See GHGSat. GHGSat Media Kit. (2021).
Available at https://www.ghgsat.com/upload/misc/
GHGSAT_MEDIAKIT_2021.pdf; Pandey, S., et al.
‘‘Satellite observations reveal extreme methane
leakage from a natural gas well blowout.’’
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,
Vol. 116, no. 52. Pp. 26376–26381, December 16,
2019, available at https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.
1908712116; Jacob, D. J., et al. ‘‘Quantifying
methane emissions from the global scale down to
point sources using satellite observations of
atmospheric methane.’’ Atmospheric Chemistry and
Physics, Vol. 22, Issue 14, pp. 9617–9646, July 29,
2022, available at https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-229617-2022; Anderson, V., et al. ‘‘Technological
opportunities for sensing of the health effects of
weather and climate change: a state-of-the-artreview.’’ International Journal of Biometeorology,
Vol. 65, Issue 6, pp. 779–803, January 11, 2021,
available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-02002063-z. The documents are also available in the
docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
9 Anderson et al. (2021).
10 See Conrad, B. M., Tyner, D. R. & Johnson, M.
R. ‘‘Robust probabilities of detection and
quantification uncertainty for aerial methane
detection: Examples for three airborne
technologies.’’ Remote Sensing of Environment,
Vol. 288, p. 113499, available at https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.rse.2023.113499. 2023; Duren, R. M., et al.
‘‘California’s methane super-emitters.’’ Nature, Vol.
575, Issue 7781, pp. 180–184, available at https://
doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1720-3. 2019; Thorpe,
A.K., et al. ‘‘Airborne DOAS retrievals of methane,
carbon dioxide, and water vapor concentrations at
high spatial resolution: application to AVIRIS–NG.’’
Atmos. Meas. Tech., 10, 3833–3850, available at
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-3833-2017. 2017;
Staebell, C., et al. ‘‘Spectral calibration of the
MethaneAIR instrument.’’ Atmospheric
Measurement Techniques, Vol. 14, Issue 5, pp.
3737–3753, available at https://doi.org/10.5194/
amt-14-3737-2021. 2021. The documents are also
available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
11 Morales, R., et al. ‘‘Controlled-release
experiment to investigate uncertainties in UAVbased emission quantification for methane point
sources.’’ Atmos. Meas. Tech., 15, 2177–2198,
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-2177-2022, 2022.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
12 Ravikumar, A. P., et al. ‘‘Single-blind intercomparison of methane detection technologies—
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
remote sensing technologies, the size of
the area monitored is typically inversely
related to the detection levels. Further
discussion of our review of top-down
technologies is available in the subpart
W TSD, available in the docket for this
rulemaking.
There have been several studies
asserting that bottom-up CH4 emission
estimates reported by subpart W
facilities underestimate annual CH4
emissions.13 This underestimate is often
attributed to large, often episodic
emissions (i.e., super-emitters).14
Emissions estimates developed with
remote sensing data may be more likely
to include super-emitters, and therefore,
to the extent that they capture emissions
that would not have otherwise been
included under prior GHGRP
regulations, they can demonstrate where
existing reporting data may
underestimate total emissions. Some
top-down approaches have a
demonstrated ability to provide data
useful for quantifying emissions from
very large, distinct emission events,
such as production well blowouts. In
the U.S. GHG Inventory, the EPA has
results from the Stanford/EDF Mobile Monitoring
Challenge.’’ Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene
1 January 2019; 7 37. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/
elementa.373. Available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–
0234.
13 See, e.g., Caulton, et al. ‘‘Toward a better
understanding and quantification of methane
emissions from shale gas development.’’
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,
Vol. 111, Issue 17, pp. 6237–6242, available at
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1316546111. 2014;
Alvarez, et al. ‘‘Quantifying Regional Methane
Emissions in the New Mexico Permian Basin with
a Comprehensive Aerial Survey.’’ Environmental
Science & Technology, Vol. 56, Issue 7, pp. 4317–
4323, available at https://doi.org/10.1126/science.
aar7204. 2018; Zhang, et al. ‘‘Quantifying methane
emissions from the largest oil-producing basin in
the United States from space.’’ Science Advances,
Vol. 6, Issue 17, available at https://doi.org/
10.1126/sciadv.aaz5120. 2020. The documents are
also available in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
14 See, e.g., Zavala-Ariaza, et al. ‘‘Reconciling
divergent estimates of oil and gas methane
emissions.’’ Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences, Vol. 112, Issue 51, pp. 15597–15602,
available at https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.
1522126112. 2017; Cusworth, et al. ‘‘Intermittency
of Large Methane Emitters in the Permian Basin.’’
Environmental Science & Technology Letters, Vol.
8, Issue 7, pp. 567–573, available at https://doi.org/
10.1021/acs.estlett.1c00173. 2021; Chen, et al.
‘‘Quantifying Regional Methane Emissions in the
New Mexico Permian Basin with a Comprehensive
Aerial Survey.’’ Environmental Science &
Technology, Vol. 56, Issue 7, pp. 4317–4323,
available at https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.1c06458.
2022; Wang, et al. ‘‘Multiscale Methane
Measurements at Oil and Gas Facilities Reveal
Necessary Frameworks for Improved Emissions
Accounting.’’ Environmental Science & Technology,
Vol. 56, Issue 20, pp. 14743–14752, available at
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.2c06211. 2022. The
documents are also available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–
0234.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
already incorporated emissions
estimates developed from such
approaches to calculate emissions from
well blowouts.15 In this proposal, data
from such approaches could be used to
identify and/or calculate emission rates
of other large release events (see section
III.B of this preamble).
In this proposal, the EPA is proposing
to include emissions from large
emissions events and super-emitters in
the subpart W reporting program. This
proposed addition would directly
address the concerns identified by a
multitude of studies about the
contribution of super-emitters to total
emissions and help to ensure the
completeness and accuracy of emissions
reporting data. The top-down
monitoring approaches that have
demonstrated their accuracy and ability
to identify such events are a central
feature of the proposed changes. This
top-down data may also help to flag
areas where there is a large gap between
the bottom-up CH4 emissions estimates
and the top-down measurement data,
requiring facilities to revise emission
estimates. In this proposal, we are
proposing to require facilities to
consider notifications of potential
super-emitter emissions event under the
super-emitter provisions of NSPS
OOOOb at 40 CFR 60.5371b and
calculate associated events when they
exceed our proposed thresholds if they
are not already accounted for under
another source category in subpart W.
We expect that under the proposed
methodology for other large release
events in this proposal, data from some
top-down approaches, including data
derived from equipment leak and
fugitive emissions monitoring using
advanced screening methods which is
conducted under NSPS OOOOb or the
applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part
62, in combination with other empirical
data, could be used by reporters to
calculate the total emissions from these
events and/or estimate duration of such
an event.
While this top-down data is very
useful in identifying possible large
emissions events that are not captured
by other reporting obligations, it is not
presently able to provide annual
emissions data to the degree of accuracy
and certainty required by other
provisions of this rulemaking. It is not
15 U.S. EPA. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas
Emissions and Sinks 1990–2020: Updates for
Anomalous Events including Well Blowout and
Well Release Emissions. April 2022. Available at
https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/202204/2022_ghgi_update_-_blowouts.pdf and in the
docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
currently possible to use remote sensing
data as the only basis to extrapolate
annual emissions data. Most top-down,
facility measurements are taken over
limited durations (a few minutes to a
few hours) typically during the daylight
hours and limited to times when
specific meteorological conditions exist
(e.g., no cloud cover for satellites;
specific atmospheric stability and wind
speed ranges for aerial measurements).
These direct measurement data taken at
a single moment in time may not be
representative of the annual CH4
emissions from the facility, given that
many emissions are episodic. If
emissions are found during a limited
duration sampling, that does not
necessarily mean they are present for
the entire year. And if emissions are not
found during a limited duration
sampling, that does not mean significant
emissions are not occurring at other
times. Extrapolating from limited
measurements to an entire year
therefore creates risk of either over or
under counting actual emissions.
While top-down measurement
methods, including satellite and aerial
methods, have proven their ability to
identify and measure large emissions
events, their detection limits may be too
high to detect emissions from sources
with relatively low emission rates.16
The data provided by some of these
technologies are at large spatial scales,
with limited ability to disaggregate to
the facility- or emission source-level
and have high minimum detection
limits. So while these technologies can
provide very useful information about
emissions during snapshots in time, and
thus help to greatly improve the
completeness and accuracy of emission
reporting, they generally cannot by
themselves estimate annual emissions.
This rule proposes to use these topdown methods to supplement the other
requirements for periodic measurement
and calculation of annual emissions.
In addition to the proposed use of topdown data to help identify and quantify
super-emitter and other large emissions
events, we invite comment on whether
there are other appropriate uses of topdown data for the purposes of reporting
under subpart W of the GHGRP,
including what types of emission
sources and emission events, what
specific top-down methods may be
appropriate, especially in terms of
spatial scale and minimum detection
limits. As described above, the different
16 Duren, et al. ‘‘California’s methane superemitters.’’ Nature, Vol. 575, Issue 7781, pp. 180–
184, available at https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586019-1720-3. 2019. Available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–
0234.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
types of top-down data have a wide
range of detection limits and spatial
resolution, which makes it difficult to
reliably convert point estimates to an
annual emissions estimate as required
by the GHGRP. Therefore, this proposal
does not propose using top-down
approaches for sources other than
besides other large release events due to
the limitations described earlier in this
section. However, we invite comment
on whether there are top-down
approaches that could be used to
estimate annual emissions for any
source categories under subpart W or for
facility-level emissions, what level of
accuracy should be required for such
use, and whether the development of
standards (either by the EPA or thirdparty organizations) could help inform
this determination. We also invite
comment on how frequently
measurements would need to be
conducted to be considered reliable or
representative of annual emissions for
reporting purposes.
We invite comment on how best to
combine top-down data with bottom-up
methods in a way that avoids double
counting of emissions. For example,
top-down data may be used to refine
emission estimates for particular
sources or for the facility. We also seek
comment on the best methods to
estimate duration of events measured
using top-down measurements and
extrapolation to annual emissions. We
also invite comment on the associated
modeling necessary to incorporate topdown data and the associated
uncertainties for calculating facilitylevel emissions. We also request
comment on how to account for the
types of limitations described in this
section.
C. Revisions to Reporting Requirements
To Improve Verification and
Transparency of the Data Collected
The EPA is proposing several
revisions to existing reporting
requirements to collect data that would
improve verification of reported data
and ensure accurate reporting of
emissions or improve the transparency
of the data collected. Such revisions
would better enable the EPA to obtain
data that is of sufficient quality and
granularity that it can be used to
support a range of future climate change
policies and regulations under the CAA,
including but not limited to information
relevant to carrying out CAA section
136, provisions involving research,
evaluating and setting standards,
endangerment determinations, or
informing EPA non-regulatory programs
under the CAA.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50291
We are proposing to add or revise
reporting requirements to better
characterize the emissions for several
emission sources. For example, we are
proposing to collect additional
information from facilities with liquids
unloadings to differentiate between
manual and automated unloadings.
Other proposed revisions to the rule
include changes that would better align
reporting with the calculation methods
in the rule. For example, we are
proposing to revise reporting
requirements related to atmospheric
pressure fixed roof storage tanks
receiving hydrocarbon liquids that
follow the methodology specified in 40
CFR 98.233(j)(3) and equation W–15.
The current calculation methodology
uses population emission factors and
the count of applicable separators,
wells, or non-separator equipment to
determine the annual total volumetric
GHG emissions at standard conditions.
The associated reporting requirements
in existing 40 CFR 98.236(j)(2)(i)(E) and
(F) require reporters to delineate the
counts used in equation W–15. Based on
feedback from reporters, the EPA’s
assessment in this proposal is that the
reporting requirements are inconsistent
with the language used in the
calculation methodology and are not
inclusive of all equipment to be
included. Therefore, we are proposing
to revise the reporting requirements to
better align the requirement with the
calculation methodology and streamline
the requirements for all facilities
reporting atmospheric storage tanks
emissions using the methodology in 40
CFR 98.233(j)(3).
In some cases, we are proposing to
remove duplicative reporting elements
within or across GHGRP subparts to
reduce data inconsistencies and
reporting errors. For example, we are
proposing to eliminate duplicative
reporting between subpart NN
(Suppliers of Natural Gas and Natural
Gas Liquids) and subpart W where both
subparts require similar data elements
to be reported to the electronic
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Tool (eGGRT). For instance, for fractionators of
natural gas liquids (NGLs), both subpart
W (under the Onshore Natural Gas
Processing segment) and subpart NN
require reporting of the volume of
natural gas received and the volume of
NGLs received. The proposed
amendments would limit the reporting
of these data elements to facilities that
do not report under subpart NN, thus
removing the duplicative requirements
from subpart W for facilities that report
to both subparts. This would improve
the EPA’s ability to verify the reported
data across subparts.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50292
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
D. Technical Amendments,
Clarifications, and Corrections
We are proposing other technical
amendments, corrections, and
clarifications that would improve
understanding of the rule. These
revisions primarily include revisions of
requirements to better reflect the EPA’s
intent or editorial changes. Some of
these proposed changes result from
consideration of questions raised by
reporters through the GHGRP Help Desk
or e-GGRT. In particular, we are
proposing amendments for several
source types that would emphasize the
original intent of certain rule
requirements, such as reported data
elements that have been misinterpreted
by reporters. In several cases, the
misinterpretation of these provisions
may have resulted in reporting that is
inconsistent with the rule requirements.
The proposed clarifications would
increase the likelihood that reporters
will submit accurate reports the first
time. For example, the EPA is proposing
to revise the definition of variable ‘‘Tt’’
in existing equation W–1 (proposed
equation W–1B) in 40 CFR 98.233 and
the corresponding reporting
requirements in proposed 40 CFR
98.236(b)(4)(ii)(C)(4), (b)(4)(iii)(C)(3),
and (b)(5)(i)(C)(2) to use the term ‘‘in
service (i.e., supplied with natural gas)’’
rather than ‘‘operational’’ or
‘‘operating.’’ This proposed revision
would emphasize the EPA’s intent that
the average number of hours used in
equation W–1 should be the number of
hours that the devices of a particular
type are in service (i.e., the devices are
receiving a measurement signal and
connected to a natural gas supply that
is capable of actuating a valve or other
device as needed). These proposed
clarifications and corrections would
also reduce the burden associated with
reporting, data verification, and EPA
review. Additional details of these types
of proposed changes are discussed in
section III of this preamble.
We are also proposing to revise
applicability provisions for certain
industry segments and applicable
calculation methods. For example, we
are proposing to revise the definition of
the Onshore Natural Gas Processing
industry segment to remove the gas
throughput threshold so that the
applicable industry segment and
calculation methods are defined from
the beginning of the year. The current
definition of the Onshore Natural Gas
Processing industry segment includes
processing plants that fractionate gas
liquids and processing plants that do
not fractionate gas liquids but have an
annual average throughput of 25 million
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
standard cubic feet (MMscf) per day or
greater. Processing plants that do not
fractionate gas liquids and have an
annual average throughput of less than
25 MMscf per day may be part of a
facility in the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segment. Processing plants that
do not fractionate gas liquids and
generally operate close to the 25 MMscf
per day threshold do not know until the
end of the year whether they will be
above or below the threshold, so they
must be prepared to report under
whichever industry segment is
ultimately applicable. Therefore, as
discussed in greater detail in section
III.A.3 of this preamble, we are
proposing to revise the Onshore Natural
Gas Processing industry segment
definition in 40 CFR 98.230(a)(3) to
remove the 25 MMscf per day threshold
and more closely align subpart W with
the definitions of natural gas processing
in other rules (e.g., NSPS OOOOa). This
proposed revision to the Onshore
Natural Gas Processing industry
segment definition would better define
whether a processing plant would be
classified as an Onshore Natural Gas
Processing facility or as part of an
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting facility, and the
applicable segment would not have the
potential to change from one year to the
next simply based on the facility
throughput.
Additional details of these types of
proposed changes may be found in
section III of this preamble.
Other minor changes being proposed
include correction edits to fix typos,
minor clarifications such as adding a
missing word, harmonizing changes to
match other proposed revisions,
reordering of paragraphs so that a larger
number of paragraphs need not be
renumbered, and others as reflected in
the draft proposed redline regulatory
text in the docket for this rulemaking
(Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–
0234).
III. Proposed Amendments to 40 CFR
Part 98
This section summarizes the specific
substantive amendments proposed for
subpart W (as well as subparts A and C),
as generally described in section II of
this preamble. Section III.A describes
amendments that affect reporting
responsibility or applicability. Sections
III.B through III.U of this preamble
describe proposed technical
amendments that would affect specific
source types or industry segments. We
are also proposing the miscellaneous
subpart W technical corrections and
clarifications listed in section III.V of
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
this preamble. We are also proposing
related confidentiality determinations
for new or revised data elements that
result from these proposed
amendments, as discussed in section V
of this preamble. The impacts of the
proposed revisions are summarized in
section VI of this preamble. A full
discussion of the cost impacts for the
proposed revisions may be found in the
memorandum, Assessment of Burden
Impacts for Proposed Revisions for the
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule
available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2023–0234.
A. General and Applicability
Amendments
1. Ownership Transfer
When there is a change in ownership
for facilities reported under the GHGRP,
the provisions of existing 40 CFR
98.4(h) describe the responsibilities of
the owners and operators. However,
asset transactions between owners and
operators sometimes involve only some
emission sources at the facility rather
than the entire facility, particularly in
the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production and Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segments in subpart W (which
are two of the industry segments that
have unique definitions of ‘‘facility’’). In
those cases, reporters have submitted
numerous questions to the GHGRP Help
Desk requesting guidance regarding
which owner or operator should report
for the year in which the transaction
occurred as well as which owner or
operator is responsible for submitting
revisions and responding to questions
from the EPA regarding previous annual
GHG reports. To assist manufacturers
regarding some of these questions, the
EPA previously developed Frequently
Asked Questions (FAQ) Q749.17
However, neither the FAQ nor the
existing requirements in subpart A
explicitly explain the responsibilities
for the situations for which reporters
have requested guidance.
Therefore, the EPA is proposing to
add specific provisions to subpart A in
17 U.S. EPA. Q749: ‘‘What are the notification
requirements when an Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production facility, reporting under
subpart W, sells wells and associated equipment in
a basin?’’ September 26, 2019. https://
ccdsupport.com/confluence/pages/
viewpage.action?pageId=198705183. Note that
although FAQ Q749 specifically describes facilities
in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production segment, the EPA does consider the
scenarios described to be relevant to the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segment as well, because facilities in both
segments are defined at the basin level rather than
at the level of the subpart A definition of facility.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
a proposed new paragraph 40 CFR
98.4(n) that would apply in lieu of
existing 40 CFR 98.4(h) for changes in
the owner or operator of a facility in the
four industry segments in subpart W
(Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems)
that have unique definitions of facility.
The proposed provisions would define
which owner or operator is responsible
for current and future reporting years’
reports and clarify how to determine
responsibility for revisions to annual
reports for reporting years prior to
owner or operator changes for specific
industry segments in subpart W,
beginning with RY2025 reports. The
proposed provisions would also specify
when an owner or operator would
submit an annual report using an eGGRT identifier assigned to an existing
facility and when an owner or operator
would register a new facility in e-GGRT.
As described in more detail in this
section, the provisions would vary
based upon whether the selling owner
or operator would retain any emission
sources, the number of purchasing
owners or operators, and whether the
purchasing owners or operators already
report to the GHGRP in the same
industry segment and basin or state (as
applicable). These proposed revisions
are expected to improve data quality as
described in section II.C of this
preamble by ensuring that the EPA
receives a more complete data set, and
they are also expected to improve
understanding of the rule, as described
in section II.D of this preamble.
We expect all the transactions fall into
one of four general categories, and we
are proposing provisions that would
define the responsibilities for reporting
for each of those general categories.
First, if the entire facility is sold to a
single purchaser and the purchasing
owner or operator does not already
report to the GHGRP in that industry
segment (and basin or state, as
applicable), then we are proposing that
the facility’s certificate of representation
must be updated within 90 days of the
transaction to reflect the new owner or
operator. In other words, the e-GGRT
identifier and associated facility within
e-GGRT would be transferred from the
seller to the purchaser. The purchasing
owner or operator would be responsible
for submitting the facility’s annual
report for the entire reporting year in
which the acquisition occurred (i.e., the
owner or operator as of December 31
would be responsible for the report for
that entire reporting year) and each
reporting year thereafter. In addition,
because the definitions of facility for
each of these segments encompass all of
the emission sources in a particular
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
geographic area (i.e., basin, state, or
nation), the purchasing owner or
operator would include any other
applicable emission sources already
owned by that purchasing owner or
operator in the same geographic area as
part of the purchased facility beginning
with the reporting year in which the
acquisition occurred. The purchasing
owner or operator would also become
responsible for responding to EPA
questions and making any necessary
revisions to annual GHG reports for
reporting years prior to the reporting
year in which the acquisition occurred.
This scenario is the most similar to
ownership transfer for facilities in other
subparts, and this proposed amendment
would specify that the responsibility for
reporting should be similar to the
existing requirements for all subparts.
Second, if the entire facility is sold to
a single purchaser and the purchasing
owner or operator already reports to the
GHGRP in that industry segment (and
basin or state, as applicable), then we
are proposing that the purchasing owner
or operator would merge the acquired
facility with their existing facility for
purposes of reporting under the GHGRP.
In other words, the acquired facility
would become part of the purchaser’s
existing facility under the GHGRP and
emissions for the combined facility
would be reported under the e-GGRT
identifier for the purchaser’s existing
facility. The purchaser would update
the acquired facility’s certificate of
representation within 90 days of the
transaction to reflect the new owner or
operator. The purchaser would then
follow the provisions of 40 CFR
98.2(i)(6) to notify the EPA that the
purchased facility has merged with their
existing facility and would provide the
e-GGRT identifier for the merged, or
reconstituted, facility. Finally, the
purchaser would be responsible for
submitting the merged facility’s annual
report for the entire reporting year in
which the acquisition occurred (i.e., the
owner or operator as of December 31
would be responsible for the report for
that entire reporting year) and each
reporting year thereafter. The
purchasing owner or operator would
also become responsible for responding
to EPA questions and making any
necessary revisions to annual GHG
reports for the purchased facility for
reporting years prior to the reporting
year in which the acquisition occurred.
In this scenario, an entire facility is
changing ownership, and this proposed
amendment would specify that the
responsibility for reporting should be
similar to the existing requirements for
all subparts.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50293
Third, if the selling owner or operator
retains some of the emission sources
and sells the other emission sources of
the seller’s facility to one or more
purchasing owners or operators, we are
proposing that the selling owner or
operator would continue to report under
subpart W for the retained emission
sources unless and until that facility
meets one of the criteria in 40 CFR
98.2(i) and complies with those
provisions. Each purchasing owner or
operator that does not already report to
the GHGRP in that industry segment
(and basin or state, as applicable) would
begin reporting as a new facility for the
entire reporting year beginning with the
reporting year in which the acquisition
occurred. The new facility would
include the acquired applicable
emission sources as well as any
previously owned applicable emission
sources. We note that, under the
proposed provisions, because the new
facility would contain acquired
emission sources that were part of a
facility that was subject to the
requirements of part 98 and already
reporting to the GHGRP, the purchasing
owner or operator would follow the
provisions of 40 CFR 98.2(i) and
continue to report unless and until one
of the criteria in 40 CFR 98.2(i)(1)
through (6) are met, instead of
comparing the facility’s emissions to the
reporting threshold in 40 CFR 98.231(a)
to determine if they should begin
reporting. Each purchasing owner or
operator that already reports to the
GHGRP in that industry segment (and
basin or state, as applicable) would add
the acquired applicable emission
sources to their existing facility for
purposes of reporting under subpart W
and would be responsible for submitting
the annual report for their entire facility,
including the acquired emission
sources, for the entire reporting year
beginning with the reporting year in
which the acquisition occurred.
Fourth, if the selling owner or
operator does not retain any of the
emission sources and sells all of the
facility’s emission sources to more than
one purchasing owner or operator, we
are proposing that the selling owner or
operator for the existing facility would
notify the EPA within 90 days of the
transaction that all of the facility’s
emission sources were acquired by
multiple purchasers. The purchasing
owners or operators would begin
submitting annual reports for the
acquired emission sources for the
reporting year in which the acquisition
occurred following the same provisions
as in the third scenario. In other words,
each owner or operator would either
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50294
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
begin reporting their acquired
applicable emission sources as a new
facility or add the acquired applicable
emission sources to their existing
facility.
Finally, for the third and fourth types
of transactions, we are proposing one set
of provisions to clarify responsibility for
annual GHG reports for reporting years
prior to the reporting year in which the
acquisition occurred. This set of
proposed provisions would apply to
annual GHG reports for facilities where
these types of transactions occur after
the effective date of the final
amendments, if adopted. In other words,
if the effective date of the final
amendments is January 1, 2025, as
described in section V of this preamble,
then for ownership transactions that
occur on or after January 1, 2025, we are
proposing that the proposed
requirements for the current and future
reporting years described in the
previous paragraphs would apply. In
addition, the proposed provisions for
annual GHG reports for reporting years
prior to the transaction would also
apply. For example, if an ownership
transaction occurs on June 30, 2027,
then the selling owner or operator and
purchasing owner or operator would
follow the proposed applicable
provisions previously described in this
section for the RY2027 report and for
future reporting years. In this example
scenario, the proposed provisions
described in the next paragraph would
apply for RY2026 and prior years’
reports.
Specifically, we are proposing that as
part of the third and fourth types of
ownership change described previously
in this section, the selling owner or
operator and each purchasing owner or
operator would be required to select by
an agreement binding on the owners
and operators (following the procedures
specified in 40 CFR 98.4(b)) a ‘‘historic
reporting representative’’ that would be
responsible for revisions to annual GHG
reports for previous reporting years
within 90 days of the transaction. The
EPA expects that the agreement
regarding the historic reporting
representative would be entered into at
the time of the acquisition and that if
the representative responsible for
revisions to annual GHG reports is not
employed by the selling owner or
operator, copies of the records required
to be retained per 40 CFR 98.3(g) and (h)
would be transferred to the historic
reporting representative at that time.
The historic reporting representative for
each facility that would respond to any
EPA questions regarding GHG reports
for previous reporting years and would
submit corrected versions of GHG
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
reports for previous reporting years as
needed. In many situations, the EPA
expects that the purchaser would agree
to select a historic reporting
representative to address revisions to
previous years’ annual GHG reports. In
particular, there may be cases in which
the selling owner or operator’s company
will no longer be operating after the
transaction, so it may be appropriate for
one of the purchasing owners or
operators to select that historic reporting
representative. In other situations, the
parties may determine that it is
appropriate for the seller to select the
historic reporting representative to
address revisions to annual GHG reports
for reporting years prior to the reporting
year in which the acquisition occurred.
In the 2022 Proposed Rule, the EPA
proposed that if this historic reporting
representative is not the current
designated representative for the
facility, the historic reporting
representative would need to be
appointed as the alternate designated
representative or an agent for the
facility. However, in some cases this
could provide that individual with
access to the facility’s data for reporting
years other than the previous reporting
years for which that individual is
responsible, including potentially
confidential or sensitive information
and correspondence. Therefore, the EPA
is not proposing to specify that the
historic reporting representative would
be required to be appointed as the
alternate designated representative or an
agent for the facility.
Finally, we are proposing to amend 40
CFR 98.2(i)(3), the current provision
that allows an owner or operator to
discontinue reporting to the GHGRP
when all applicable processes and
operations cease to operate. Through
correspondence with reporters via eGGRT, we are aware that there have
been times that an owner or operator
divested a facility and was therefore no
longer required to report the emissions
from that facility, but even though the
facility changed owners and did not
cease operating, the selling owner or
operator chose the provisions of existing
40 CFR 98.2(i)(3) as the reason they
were ceasing to report because none of
the other options fit the situation. The
EPA’s intent is that this reason for no
longer reporting to the GHGRP should
only be used in cases in which all the
applicable sources permanently ceased
operation. Therefore, we are proposing
to clarify that 40 CFR 98.2(i)(3) would
not apply when there is a change in the
owner or operator for facilities in these
four industry segments, unless the
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
changes result in permanent cessation of
all applicable processes and operations.
2. Definition of ‘‘Owner’’ and
‘‘Operator’’
We are also proposing to amend 40
CFR 98.1(c) to clarify that the terms
‘‘owner’’ and ‘‘operator’’ used in subpart
A have the same meaning as the terms
‘‘gathering and boosting system owner
or operator’’ and ‘‘onshore natural gas
transmission pipeline owner or
operator’’ for the Onshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
and Onshore Natural Gas Transmission
Pipeline industry segments of subpart
W, respectively. This paragraph was
inadvertently not amended when those
two industry segments and the industry
segment-specific definitions of owner or
operator were added to subpart W (80
FR 64275, October 22, 2015), and this
proposed amendment would correct
that oversight, consistent with section
II.D of this preamble.
3. Onshore Natural Gas Processing
Industry Segment Definition
According to existing 40 CFR
98.230(a)(3), the Onshore Natural Gas
Processing industry segment currently
includes all facilities that fractionate
NGLs. The industry segment also
includes all facilities that separate NGLs
from natural gas or remove sulfur and
carbon dioxide (CO2) from natural gas,
provided the annual average throughput
at the facility is 25 MMscf per day or
greater. The industry segment also
includes all residue gas compression
equipment owned or operated by
natural gas processing facilities that is
not located within the facility
boundaries.
One stakeholder expressed concern
that the current definition of the
Onshore Natural Gas Processing
industry segment applies to some
compressor stations simply because
they have an amine unit that is used to
remove sulfur and CO2 from natural
gas.18 According to this stakeholder, it
would be more appropriate for such
facilities to be in the Onshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segment. This stakeholder also
explained that the 25 MMscf per day
threshold creates additional burden and
uncertainty for these compressor station
facilities because they do not know until
the end of the year whether they will be
above or below the threshold. Thus,
18 Letter from Matt Hite, GPA Midstream
Association, to Mark de Figueiredo, U.S. EPA, Re:
Additional Information on Suggested Part 98,
Subpart W Rule Revisions to Reduce Burden.
September 13, 2019. Available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–
0234.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
they need to collect the applicable data
for both the Onshore Natural Gas
Processing industry segment and the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting industry
segment so that they will have the
required data for whichever industry
segment ultimately applies to them. To
resolve this issue and to promote
consistency among regulatory programs,
this stakeholder recommended
replacing the onshore natural gas
processing definition in subpart W with
the natural gas processing plant
definition in NSPS OOOOa.
After consideration of this issue, we
are proposing to replace the definition
of ‘‘Onshore natural gas processing’’ in
40 CFR 98.230(a)(3) with language
similar to the definition of ‘‘natural gas
processing plant’’ in NSPS OOOOa.
This proposed amendment would
improve the verification and
transparency of the data, particularly
across reporting years, consistent with
section II.C of this preamble, and it
would provide reporters with certainty
about the applicable industry segment
for the reporting year, consistent with
section II.D of this preamble, allowing
them to focus their efforts on collecting
accurate monitoring data and emissions
information needed for one applicable
industry segment. As explained later in
this section, while we expect that the
proposed revisions would result in
some facilities reporting under a
different industry segment, we do not
expect that the overall coverage of the
GHGRP would decrease. Further, as the
stakeholder noted, the two potentially
applicable segments currently report
emissions from different sources and
with different calculation methods. For
example, facilities in the Onshore
Natural Gas Processing industry
segment are currently not required to
report emissions from natural gas
pneumatic devices or atmospheric
storage tanks and are currently required
to measure leaks from individual
compressors, while facilities in the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting industry
segment are currently required to report
emissions from natural gas pneumatic
devices or atmospheric storage tanks but
currently use population emission
factors to calculate emissions from all
compressors rather than conducting
measurements. However, the proposed
addition of emission sources to the
Onshore Natural Gas Processing
industry segment (as described in
section III.C.1 of this preamble) would
remove the differences in the emission
sources reported by facilities in one
industry segment and not the other. The
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
addition of calculation methodologies
for specific emission sources that would
be calculated and reported by facilities
in both industry segments would result
in fewer differences between the
emissions reported under the two
industry segments.19
NSPS OOOOa defines ‘‘natural gas
processing plant (gas plant)’’ as any
processing site engaged in the extraction
of NGLs from field gas, fractionation of
mixed NGLs to natural gas products, or
both. The definition specifies that a
Joule-Thompson valve, a dew point
depression valve, or an isolated or
standalone Joule-Thompson skid is not
a natural gas processing plant. There are
two minor editorial differences between
the proposed definition in 40 CFR
98.230(a) and the definition in NSPS
OOOOa. First, instead of defining a
natural gas processing ‘‘plant,’’ as in the
definition in NSPS OOOOa, we are
proposing to describe what is meant by
‘‘natural gas processing’’ so that the
structure of 40 CFR 98.230(a)(3) is
consistent with the structure of all of the
other industry segment definitions in 40
CFR 98.230(a). Second, the definition in
NSPS OOOOa refers to ‘‘extraction’’ of
NGLs from natural gas, but this term is
not defined. Thus, we are proposing to
retain the term ‘‘forced extraction’’ in
the current provisions of 40 CFR
98.230(a)(3) and proposing to revise the
definition of this term slightly in 40 CFR
98.238. The current definition of
‘‘forced extraction’’ specifies that forced
extraction does not include ‘‘portable
dewpoint suppression skids.’’ We are
proposing to revise the definition to
indicate instead that forced extraction
does not include ‘‘a Joule-Thomson
valve, a dewpoint depression valve, or
an isolated or standalone JouleThomson skid.’’ These changes would
make the definition of ‘‘forced
extraction’’ in subpart W consistent
with the language in the definition of a
natural gas processing plant in NSPS
OOOOa.
19 Proposed amendments described throughout
the remainder of this preamble would reduce the
differences in calculation methodologies (e.g., see
sections III.O and III.P of this preamble), but there
are still expected to be differences even if all the
proposed amendments are finalized. The
differences in calculation methodologies that would
remain are due to differences in the types of
operations and other factors such as the size of the
‘‘facility’’ between the two industry segments. In
particular, facilities in the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry
segment can be geographically dispersed, and as
such, some measurement methodologies may be
optional rather than required. In addition, the
combustion emissions for facilities in the Onshore
Natural Gas Processing industry segment are
reported under subpart C, while the combustion
emissions for facilities in the Onshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry
segment are reported under subpart W.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50295
The proposed amendments to the
processes that are considered ‘‘onshore
natural gas processing’’ are not expected
to decrease overall coverage of the
GHGRP for the petroleum and natural
gas systems industry, although we
anticipate that some operations
currently being reported as standalone
facilities under the Onshore Natural Gas
Processing industry segment would
transition to reporting as part of either
existing or new facilities under the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting industry
segment, while some operations
currently being reported as part of
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting facilities would
transition to reporting as standalone
facilities under the Onshore Natural Gas
Processing industry segment. For
example, based on reported data for
RY2020, about 19 percent of facilities
reporting in the Onshore Natural Gas
Processing industry segment do not
fractionate NGLs and report zero NGLs
received and leaving the facility. These
facilities meet the current definition of
natural gas processing because they are
separating CO2 and/or hydrogen sulfide
and/or they are capturing CO2 separated
from natural gas. These facilities would
not meet the proposed revised
definition for natural gas processing and
instead, their emissions would be
reported as part of either existing or new
onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facilities. In most
cases, we anticipate that operations at a
facility that was previously classified by
a reporter as a gas processing facility
would be incorporated into an existing
gathering and boosting facility that has
been subject to reporting, and the total
emissions from the expanded gathering
and boosting facility would be similar to
the emissions that would have been
reported by the separate facilities under
the existing industry segment
definitions. In cases where a former gas
processing facility is located in a basin
where the owner or operator does not
have an existing reporting gathering and
boosting facility, we expect that a new
gathering and boosting facility including
the former gas processing facility would
be created because the emissions from
the former gas processing facility alone
would exceed the reporting threshold of
25,000 mtCO2e. If the same owner or
operator has other gathering and
boosting operations in the same basin
that have emissions less than 25,000
mtCO2e, then the new gathering and
boosting facility could result in
increased coverage of the industry
segment and greater total reported
emissions than would be reported under
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50296
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
direct emissions under another subpart
of the GHGRP, including those facilities
in subpart W industry segments that
have a unique definition of facility in 40
CFR 98.238 and a reporting threshold
specified in 40 CFR 98.231. Therefore,
the EPA is proposing to add 40 CFR
98.232(n) (and a reference to this new
paragraph from the introductory text of
40 CFR 98.232) to clarify the intent for
subpart W reporters to also report under
subpart B, consistent with section II.D of
this preamble.
the current industry segment
definitions.
The proposed revised definition for
natural gas processing also does not
include the 25 MMscf per day threshold
for facilities that separate NGLs from
natural gas using forced extraction but
do not fractionate NGLs. Under the
current definition of onshore natural gas
processing, processing plants that do
not fractionate gas liquids and generally
operate close to the 25 MMscf per day
threshold may be natural gas processing
facilities one year and then part of an
onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facility the next
year. As noted earlier in this section, the
two potentially applicable segments
currently report emissions from
different sources and with different
calculation methods. As a result of the
current definition, it can be difficult to
track the reporting status of a facility
from one year to the next, and it can be
difficult to assess and verify reporting
trends for an individual facility across
reporting years. Under the revised
proposed definition, these sites that
separate NGLs from natural gas using
forced extraction but do not fractionate
NGLs and generally operate close to 25
MMscf per day would be considered
natural gas processing regardless of their
throughput level, so they would have
the certainty of knowing they would be
subject to reporting as natural gas
processing facilities every year. As a
result, removing the 25 MMscf per day
threshold is expected to increase the
number of sites that consistently report
as facilities under the Onshore Natural
Gas Processing industry segment instead
of sometimes reporting as part of a
facility that reports under the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting industry segment. We
request comment on the impact the
proposed changes would have on the
number of reporting facilities and
emissions from both the Onshore
Natural Gas Processing and Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting industry segments. We
also request comment on any other
advantages or disadvantages to
finalizing the proposed changes.
B. Other Large Release Events
We are proposing to add an additional
emissions source, referred to as ‘‘other
large release events,’’ to capture
maintenance or abnormal emission
events that are not fully accounted for
using existing methods in subpart W,
consistent with section II.A of this
preamble. Numerous studies have
indicated that other large release events,
commonly referred to as ‘‘superemitters,’’ significantly contribute to the
emissions from oil and gas facilities and
that the current subpart W understates
oil and gas emissions because there is a
lack of calculation and reporting
requirements for many of these large
events.20 We proposed to include
calculation and reporting requirements
for other large release events in the 2022
Proposed Rule, and this proposal
regarding other large release events is
very similar to the 2022 Proposed Rule.
The primary difference in this proposal
is that we are including an
instantaneous CH4 emission rate
threshold of 100 kg/hr, in addition to
the 250 mtCO2e per event threshold we
previously proposed, so there are two
proposed emissions thresholds for
determining whether emissions from
other large release events must be
reported. We are also proposing to
expand the definition of other large
release events to include planned
releases, such as those associated with
maintenance activities for which there
are not emission calculation procedures
in subpart W. Emptying, degassing, and
cleaning a tank is an example of a
maintenance activity for which
emissions would need to be reported
4. Applicability of Proposed Subpart B
to Subpart W Facilities
In the supplemental proposal to the
2022 Proposed Rule (88 FR 32852, May
22, 2023), the EPA is proposing to add
subpart B to part 98 (Metered, Non-fuel,
Purchased Energy Consumption by
Stationary Sources) for reporting the
quantity of metered electricity and
thermal energy purchased. The EPA’s
intent is for this new subpart to apply
to facilities that are required to report
20 See, e.g., Zavala-Araiza, D., et al., 2017, Superemitters in natural gas infrastructure are caused by
abnormal process conditions, Nat. Commun. 8,
14012, https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14012;
Alavarez, R.A., et al., 2018, Assessment of methane
emissions from the U.S. oil and gas supply chain,
Science 361(6398) 186–188, https://
www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aar7204;
Chen, Y., et al., 2022, Quantifying regional methane
emissions in the New Mexico Permian Basin with
a comprehensive aerial survey, Environmental
Science & Technology 56(7) 4317–4323, https://
doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.1c06458. Available in the
docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
under this proposal (if the emissions
exceed the thresholds for an other large
release event) that would not have been
required to report under the 2022
Proposed Rule’s definition of other large
release event.
Most of the emission sources and
methodologies included in subpart W
characterize emissions that routinely
occur at oil and gas facilities as part of
their normal operations, including
routinely occurring large emission
events, such as blowdowns. While some
sources covered by subpart W
methodologies, such as equipment
leaks, may represent ‘‘malfunctioning’’
equipment, these sources are ubiquitous
across the oil and gas sector and have
been studied and characterized and
these types of events have been
incorporated into existing subpart W
source methodologies. On the other
hand, there have been several large,
atypical release events at oil and gas
facilities over the last few years where
it was difficult to sufficiently include
these emissions in annual GHGRP
reports. For example, a storage wellhead
leak at Aliso Canyon released
approximately 100,000 metric tons (mt)
of CH4 between October 2015 and
February 2016 21 and a well blowout in
Ohio released an estimated 40,000 to
60,000 tons of CH4 in a 20-day period
in 2018.22 The emissions from these
types of releases were not well
represented using the existing
calculation methodologies in subpart W
because these were not common or
predictable events.23 For example,
subpart W includes a default emission
factor for underground gas storage
wellheads to estimate emissions from
leaking storage wellheads; however, the
data upon which that emission factor is
based do not include a release of the
magnitude estimated for Aliso Canyon
21 California Air Resources Board. 2016.
Determination of Total Methane Emissions from the
Aliso Canyon Natural Gas Leak Incident. Available
at https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/202007/aliso_canyon_methane_emissions-arb_final.pdf.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
22 Pandey, S., et al., 2019. Satellite observations
reveal extreme methane leakage from a natural gas
well blowout. Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences 116(52), 26376–26381. https://doi.org/
10.1073/pnas.1908712116. Available in the docket
for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
2023–0234.
23 The EPA notes that the full emissions from
these events were included in the U.S. GHG
Inventory based on the results of multiple
measurement studies. See U.S. EPA. Inventory of
U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks 1990–
2020: Updates for Anomalous Events including
Well Blowout and Well Release Emissions. April
2022. Available at https://www.epa.gov/system/
files/documents/2022-04/2022_ghgi_update_-_
blowouts.pdf and in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
because this type of malfunction did not
occur during the measurement study.
Recent data summarizing release events
from underground storage facilities
indicate that while the Aliso Canyon
release was large, it was not the largest
release event from an underground
storage facility and that, over the past 75
years, there have been 129 release
events from underground storage
facilities.24 The data showed emissions
from these release events are heavytailed with event emissions spanning 6
orders of magnitude, indicating that
they would not likely be accurately
described by an emission factor. Rather
than escalating the population emission
factor for all storage wellheads to
account for these releases, our
assessment is that it would be more
accurate for the population emission
factor to be based on typical frequency
and size of leaks that commonly occur
and to track these uncommon, large
releases separately. Because these
events can significantly contribute to
the total GHG emissions from this
sector, we are proposing to add, at 40
CFR 98.232, other large release events as
an emission source for which emissions
must be calculated for every industry
segment. We are also proposing new
calculation methods for estimating the
GHG emissions from other large release
events in 40 CFR 98.233(y) and
requirements for reporting other large
release events in 40 CFR 98.236(y).
These proposed additional calculation
and reporting requirements would apply
to all subpart W industry segments and
would improve the accuracy of
emissions reported under subpart W
and enhance the overall quality of the
data collected under the GHGRP.
The new calculation requirements
being proposed rely on measurement
data, if available, or a combination of
engineering estimates, process
knowledge, and best available data,
when measurement data are not
available. The proposed calculation
procedure consists of estimating the
amount of gas released and the
composition of the released gas. The
amount of gas released would generally
be calculated based on a measured or
estimated emission rate(s) and an event
duration. We are proposing that the start
time of the duration must be determined
based on monitored process parameters,
such as pressure or temperature, for
which sudden changes in the monitored
parameter signals the start of the event.
24 Li, H.Z., et al., 2022. A national estimate of U.S.
underground natural gas storage incident emissions.
Environ. Res. Lett. 17(8) 084013. https://doi.org/
10.1088/1748-9326/ac8069. Available in the docket
for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
2023–0234.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
If the monitored process parameters
cannot identify the start of the event, we
are proposing that reporters must
assume the release started on the date of
the most recent monitoring or
measurement survey that confirms the
source was not emitting at the rates
above the other large release event
reporting thresholds or assume the
duration of the event was 182 days (six
months), whichever duration is shorter.
We are proposing the end time of the
release must be the date of the
confirmed repair or confirmed cessation
of emissions. There may be events that
span across two separate reporting
years. In this case, we are proposing that
the volume of gas released specific to
each reporting year would be calculated
and reported for that reporting year
starting with RY2025.
We request comment on the proposed
default duration of 182 days (in the
absence of information on the start
time). Studies on large releases from oil
and gas facilities commonly report that
these emissions are intermittent, with
typical durations of several hours to
several days,25 but in many cases they
may be significantly longer, occurring
for weeks or months.26 For many
releases, such as maintenance events,
fires, explosions, and well blowouts, the
reporter would be able to identify the
start and end time of an event. Other
releases may be identified via
monitoring surveys or site inspections.
For these the start date can often be
identified from process operating
records or previous monitoring results.
For identifying the start date, we are
specifically proposing to allow
25 See, e.g., Chen, et al., Quantifying Regional
Methane Emissions in the New Mexico Permian
Basin with a Comprehensive Aerial Survey.
Environmental Science & Technology (Vol. 56, Issue
7, pp. 4317–4323), available at https://doi.org/
10.1021/acs.est.1c06458. 2022; Wang, et al.,
Multiscale Methane Measurements at Oil and Gas
Facilities Reveal Necessary Frameworks for
Improved Emissions Accounting. Environmental
Science & Technology (Vol. 56, Issue 20, pp. 14743–
14752), available at https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.
2c06211. 2022. Available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–
0234.
26 See, e.g., Frequently Asked Questions: Aliso
Canyon Gas Storage Facility. Public Utilities
Commission, State of California, January 26, 2021.
https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/regulatory-services/safety/
gas-safety-and-reliability-branch/aliso-canyon-wellfailure; Cusworth, et al., 2021, Multisatellite
imaging of a gas well blowout enables
quantification of total methane emissions.
Geophysical Research Letters, 48, e2020GL090864.
https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL090864; and
Maasakkers, J.D., et al., 2019. Reconstructing and
quantifying methane emissions from the full
duration of a 38-day natural gas well blowout using
space-based observations. Remote Sensing of
Environment. 112755. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.rse.2021.112755. Available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–
0234.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50297
monitoring or measurement surveys to
include methods specified in 40 CFR
98.234(a) through (d) as well as
advanced screening methods such as
monitoring systems mounted on
vehicles, drones, helicopters, airplanes,
or satellites capable of identifying
emissions at the thresholds specified for
an other large release event. However,
there will be some releases for which
the start date cannot be determined. We
selected a 182-day default duration as
this duration would include the
majority of these types of events. We
expect that facilities will typically
estimate durations based on the
monitoring of operating conditions,
with more frequent monitoring or
measurement surveys, as described
above, resulting in infrequent use of the
default. We recognize that the 182-day
default duration may cause revisions to
reports submitted for previous reporting
years in some cases; however, we expect
that these revisions would be made
prior to the final verification of the
reports for a given reporting year and
should not have significant implications
on being able to calculate the event
emissions and submit revised reports, if
needed, prior to the time waste emission
filings, if applicable, are due. We
request comment on the 182-day default
duration and ability to revise, if
necessary, subpart W reports prior to the
final verification of reports for a given
reporting year.
We also request comment on using
other default durations. Specifically, we
request comment on using a 91-day (3month) default duration rather than 182day duration, as well as on other
potential default durations. We seek
information to support default duration
assumptions. We request comment on
whether a 91-day default duration
would be reasonable. We also request
comment on using the beginning of the
calendar year as the default duration.
Using the beginning of the year as the
default duration would eliminate issues
regarding potential revisions to
previously submitted reports, but it
would lead to inconsistent reporting of
emissions from similar types of events
based on when the event occurred (or
was identified) in the calendar year. For
other large release events with an
identifiable start date in reporting year
1 and identifiable end date in reporting
year 2, some reporters may know of the
release on the day it started and other
reporters may not identify the release
until late in the overall duration. If the
reporter knows of the event in reporting
year 1, then the reporter would be
obligated to report the emissions that
occurred from this event in each
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50298
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
reporting year. However, if the reporter
does not become aware of the release
until the second reporting year, using
the start of the year as the beginning of
the default duration would result in the
reporter only being required to report
the emissions from the other large
release event that occurred in reporting
year 2, resulting in underreported
emissions.
We also considered hybrid
alternatives where the reporter would
have to evaluate company records to
identify the start date and use the actual
start date if known but use the start of
the calendar year if not known. While
there is an incentive for the reporter to
review records in reporting year 2 to
identify if the release event began prior
to the first day of the calendar year,
there would not be a similar incentive
for the reporter to review records in the
previous reporting year (reporting year
1). Instead, if waste emission charges
may apply, there would be an incentive
to simply use the default of the
beginning of the year and not review
records past this date. Under this hybrid
alternative, we would need to specify
how many months of records reporters
would be required to review to
determine the start date of the event. We
considered both 182 and 365 days of
records required to be reviewed under
this alternative hybrid approach. After
considering these various scenarios, we
selected the 182-day maximum duration
and event reporting across reporting
years to be the most accurate and
reasonable option, but we request
comment on the other options
considered as described in this section.
We also seek comment on other options
that may be used to obtain accurate
reporting of other large release event
emissions that span reporting years.
We recognize that some natural gas
releases, such as explosions or fires, will
combust or partially combust the
natural gas released. We are proposing
that reporters must estimate the portion
of the total volume of natural gas
released that was combusted in the
explosion or fire in order to determine
the average composition of GHG
released to the atmosphere during the
event. For the portion of natural gas
released via combustion in an explosion
or fire, we are proposing a maximum
combustion efficiency of 92 percent be
assumed. This maximum combustion
efficiency is consistent with the
combustion efficiency we are proposing
for flares that are not continuously
monitored as described in section III.N.1
of this preamble. We recognize that
because these releases are not through
engineered nozzles that can be designed
to promote mixing and combustion
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
efficiency, the combustion efficiency of
these releases can be highly variable.
Reporters may use a lower combustion
efficiency but may not use higher
combustion efficiency than 92 percent
for natural gas released directly in an
explosion or fire. We request comment
on these proposed provisions. We
request comment and supporting data
on the proposed maximum combustion
efficiency of 92 percent for the portion
of the total volume of natural gas
released via explosion or fire.
The proposed requirement to
calculate and report GHG emissions
from other large release events would be
limited to events that release at least 250
mtCO2e per event or have a CH4
emission rate of 100 kg/hr or greater at
any point in time. The 250 mtCO2e per
event threshold is equivalent to
approximately 500,000 standard cubic
feet (scf) of pipeline quality natural gas.
For events that span two reporting
years, we are proposing that these
thresholds apply to the event, not a
portion of the event within a given
reporting year. We selected these
proposed thresholds to capture
reporting for large emission events, such
as well blowouts, well releases, and
large pressure relief venting.
In order to establish the mass CO2e
per event reporting threshold, we
assessed other emission sources that
could qualify as large. Specifically, we
considered completions of hydraulically
fractured wells that are not controlled
(i.e., not performed using reduced
emission completions (RECs)) to be
large emissions events. RECs are
completions where gas flowback
emissions from the gas outlet of the
separator that are otherwise vented are
captured, cleaned, and routed to the
flow line or collection system, reinjected into the well or another well,
used as an on-site fuel source, or used
for other useful purpose that a
purchased fuel or raw material would
serve, with de minimis direct venting to
the atmosphere. Based on analysis of
GHGRP data for wells that are not RECs
and that vent, the U.S. GHG Inventory
developed an average emission factor of
about 360 mtCO2e per event for these
completions.27 Because this is an
average emission factor, some
uncontrolled hydraulically fractured
completions will be below this average
and some above. From this assessment,
we considered 250 mtCO2e to be a
27 U.S. EPA. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas
Emissions and Sinks 1990–2014. EPA 430–R–16–
002. April 2016. Available at https://www.epa.gov/
ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gasemissions-and-sinks-1990-2014 and in the docket
for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
2023–0234.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
reasonable emissions threshold for a
‘‘large’’ event.
While 250 mtCO2e is much lower
than the emissions from the Aliso
Canyon or Ohio well blowout releases,
we determined that a 250 mtCO2e
threshold would be needed to capture
most well blowouts. There are limited
data to quantify an ‘‘average’’ well
blowout, but the 2021 U.S. GHG
Inventory uses an oil well blowout
emission factor of 2.5 MMscf per event.
As this is an average, many well
blowouts may be less than this average
value. The 250 mtCO2e threshold is
approximately equivalent to 500,000 scf
of natural gas, which aligns with the
lower range of well blowouts expected
based on the average emission factor of
2.5 MMscf per event. This value also
aligns with the definitions of ‘‘major
release’’ in New Mexico Administrative
Code (NMAC) section 19.15.29.7, which
requires reporting under NMAC section
19.15.29.10.
We also tentatively find that the
proposed 250 mtCO2e threshold
(approximately equivalent to 500,000
scf natural gas release) is a reasonable
threshold for requiring individual
assessments of releases. In subpart Y
(Petroleum Refineries), we established
event-specific emission calculation
requirements for startup, shutdown, or
malfunction releases to a flare exceeding
500,000 scf per day (40 CFR
98.253(b)(1)(iii)). While the subpart Y
threshold is per day rather than per
event, it is also specific to flared
emissions. For flared emissions to
exceed a 250 mtCO2e threshold,
approximately 4 MMscf of natural gas
would have to be released to the flare,
which is well above the subpart Y ‘‘per
day’’ threshold for flares. Thus, we
propose that the 250 mtCO2e per event
threshold is an appropriate size
threshold for requiring event-specific
emission calculations to be performed.
More information regarding our review
and characterization of types of other
large release events is included in the
subpart W TSD, available in the docket
for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234. Emissions
from smaller or routine release events
would still be reported, as applicable,
under the source-specific calculation
and reporting requirements in subpart
W.
We are also proposing a 100 kg/hr
CH4 emission threshold to align with
the super-emitter response program
proposed in the NSPS OOOOb. These
emissions are generally intermittent,
with widely varying durations. Releases
from maintenance activities, for
example, may occur for only a few
hours, but these large, short events can
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
significantly contribute to a facility’s
emissions. The proposed emission rate
threshold for a super-emitter emissions
event under NSPS OOOOb provides a
means to get information for these large,
shorter duration releases. Therefore, we
are proposing that the 100 kg/hr CH4
emission threshold be applied as an
instantaneous emissions rate threshold,
such that any emissions from any other
large release event that emits CH4 at a
rate of 100 kg/hr or more at any point
in time must be reported.
With a combination of both a
cumulative mass emissions per event
threshold and the instantaneous 100 kg/
hr CH4 emission rate threshold, the EPA
is requesting comment whether a larger
cumulative mass emissions per event
threshold is reasonable. Specifically, we
understand that the Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA) includes, in
the definition of ‘‘incident’’ at 49 CFR
191.3, an ‘‘unintentional estimated loss
of three million cubic feet or more.’’ As
many subpart W facilities are required
to keep records of these incidents, we
request comment on the use of a 1,500
mtCO2e per event threshold, which
would be approximately equivalent to a
3 million cubic feet release of natural
gas. We request comment on whether
the CO2e mass threshold is appropriate
for considering emissions from events
such as fires, or if the threshold should
be expressed as a loss of 3 million cubic
feet or more of natural gas, whether
directly emitted or partially burned via
a fire. We also request comment on
whether these thresholds should be
assessed per event within the calendar
year, rather than just per event. We
propose that the thresholds for other
large release events would be evaluated
on a per event basis because then all
events are considered consistently
regardless of when they occur. For
example, consider a 400 mtCO2e event
that spans two calendar years, with 200
mtCO2e released in each calendar year.
As proposed, the reporter would be
required to report the other large release
event in each of the corresponding
reporting years. If, however, the
thresholds were instead evaluated on a
per event within a calendar year basis,
this emissions event would not qualify
as an other large release event in either
reporting year. There may be cases
where limiting the thresholds to events
to within a calendar year could reduce
the number of events reported without
significantly missing emissions and
potentially limiting the number of
report resubmissions. For example, if
the 400 mtCO2e event that spanned 2
calendar years resulted in 40 mtCO2e of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
emission in reporting year 1 and 360
mtCO2e of emissions in reporting year 2,
then if the thresholds were evaluated on
a per event per calendar year basis, only
the emissions in reporting year 2 would
be required to be reported. Under the
thresholds as proposed, the 40 mtCO2e
of emission in reporting year 1 would be
required to be reported. Depending on
when the other large release event was
identified and start date determined,
this may require resubmission of a
previously submitted subpart W report.
We request comment on whether the
other large release event thresholds
should be limited to releases within a
single calendar year.
We are proposing a definition of
‘‘other large release events’’ in 40 CFR
98.238 to clarify the types of releases
that must be characterized for this new
emissions source and specify that other
large release events include, but are not
limited to, maintenance events, well
blowouts, well releases, releases from
equipment rupture, fire, or explosions.
Currently, there are no calculation
methodologies or reporting
requirements for these types of large
releases in subpart W. The proposed
definition would also include large
pressure relief valve releases from
process equipment other than onshore
production and onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting
storage tanks that are not included in
the blowdown definition. The proposed
definition of other large release events
excludes pressure relief valve releases
from hydrocarbon liquids storage tanks
because the calculation methodology for
storage tanks is expected to account for
these releases via either the proposed
requirements to account for collection
efficiency when emissions are observed
from the thief hatch or the additional
term in the emissions equation for when
there is a stuck dump valve. While
subpart W currently includes emission
factors for pressure relief devices, these
equipment leak emission factors only
account for leaks past a pressure relief
valve that is in the closed position, not
releases from the complete opening of
these valves. The proposed definition
specifies that pressure relief valve
releases from onshore production and
onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting storage tanks
would not be considered other large
release events because the calculation
methodology for these storage tanks
currently assumes all flash gas will be
emitted. As noted in section III.K of this
preamble, pressure relief emission
releases from onshore production and
onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting storage tanks
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50299
generally occur from the thief hatch and
these releases must be accounted for
when calculating the fraction of flash
gas that is recovered or sent to a flare,
if applicable. A more detailed
discussion of certain other emissions
events we have identified and expect to
be subject to the ‘‘other large release
events’’ proposed amendments is
included in the subpart W TSD
available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2023–0234.
As part of the proposed definition of
‘‘other large release events’’ in 40 CFR
98.238, we are also proposing that other
large release events include releases
from equipment for which the existing
calculation methodologies in subpart W
would significantly underestimate the
episodic nature of these emissions. For
example, subpart W contains population
emission factors and leaker emission
factors for estimating equipment leak
emissions for storage wellheads. Thus, it
is possible to argue that subpart W
includes calculation methodologies for
the equipment responsible for the Aliso
Canyon release. However, the
calculation methodologies in subpart W
do not accurately estimate emissions
from such an uncharacteristically large
release event because such events are
infrequent such that they may not exist
when measurement studies are
conducted. Additionally, if we proposed
to instead revise the emission factors
under the existing methodologies to
account for such an event, the resulting
calculation would likely yield
erroneously high emissions from normal
operations for most reporting facilities.
Thus, we determined that it is more
accurate for facility-specific reporting to
account for these large releases on a per
event basis. Therefore, if a single leak or
event has emissions that exceed the
emissions estimated by an applicable
methodology included in subpart W by
250 mtCO2e or more on a per event
basis, or 100 kg/hr of CH4 or more as an
instantaneous rate at any time during an
event, we are proposing that such
releases would be included in the
definition of ‘‘other large release events’’
and that reporters would be required to
calculate and report the GHG emissions
from these events using the proposed
requirements for other large release
events. We are proposing in 40 CFR
98.233(y)(1)(ii) that this provision does
not require the direct measurement of
every release, such as measurement of
every leak identified during an
equipment leak monitoring survey.
However, we are proposing to require
that if the owner or operator has
credible information that demonstrates
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50300
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
that the release meets or exceeds or may
reasonably be anticipated to meet or
exceed (or to have met or have
exceeded) the emissions calculated by
the source-specific methodology by 250
mtCO2e or more, or 100 kg/hr of CH4 or
more, then the release must be
quantified and, if the thresholds are
confirmed to be exceeded, reported as
an other large release event. We
consider credible information would
include, but is not limited to, data from
monitoring or measurement data
completed by the facility, information
from notifications as a potential superemitter emissions event under the
super-emitter provisions of NSPS
OOOOb at proposed 40 CFR 60.5371b or
data of similar quality as that provided
through the provisions of NSPS OOOOb
at proposed 40 CFR 60.5371b that is
received by the facility. We anticipate
that we would take into consideration
what is included in the final NSPS
OOOOb regarding such notifications in
the types of information that would be
considered credible for these provisions
in subpart W, if finalized. The owner or
operator would be required to consider
all credible information they have
regarding the release in complying with
this requirement.
Further, we are proposing to define
the terms ‘‘well release’’ and ‘‘well
blowout’’ in 40 CFR 98.238 to assist
reporting facilities with differentiating
between these types of release events
that could potentially occur at wells. We
find that a well blowout is generally
distinguished by a complete loss of well
control for a long duration of time and
a well release is characterized as a short
period of uncontrolled release (not the
controlled pre-separation stage of well
flowback in a hydraulically fractured
completion) followed by a period of
controlled release in which control
techniques were successfully
implemented.
Finally, we are proposing a series of
reporting requirements in 40 CFR
98.236(y) related to the type, location,
duration, calculations, and emissions of
each ‘‘other large release event.’’
Specifically, we are proposing that
reporters provide the location, a
description of the release (from a
specified list that includes an ‘‘other
(specify)’’ option for releases that are
not described well with the list
provided), a description of the
technology or method used to identify
the release, volume of gas released,
volume fractions of CO2 and CH4 in the
gas released, and CO2 and CH4
emissions for each ‘‘other large release
event.’’ We are also proposing that
reporters would provide the start date
and time of the release, duration of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
release, and the method used to
determine the start date and time
(options would include a pressure
monitor, a temperature monitor, other
monitored process parameter, most
recent monitoring or measurement
survey showing no large release, or the
default assumption that the release
started 182 days prior to the
documented end of the release (this
would be the required assumption if
they do not have monitored data
associated with the release). We are also
proposing that reporters provide a
general description of the event and
indicate whether the ‘‘other large release
event’’ was also identified as a potential
super-emitter emissions event under the
super-emitter provisions of NSPS
OOOOb at 40 CFR 60.5371b or an
applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part
62.
We are proposing that reporters that
received super-emitter emissions event
notifications would be required to
report information on each release
notification received, including latitude
and longitude of the release, whether
the release was received under the
super-emitter provisions of NSPS
OOOOb at 40 CFR 60.5371b or an
applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part
62 or another notifier. If the notification
is from another notifier, the reporter
would provide the name of the notifier,
the remote sensing method used, the
date and time of the measurement, the
measured emission rate, and uncertainty
bounds on the emission rate, if provided
by the notifier. We are also proposing
that, for each notification received,
facilities would report the type of event
resulting in the emissions (e.g., normal
operations, a planned maintenance
event, leaking equipment,
malfunctioning equipment or device, or
undetermined cause) and an indication
of whether the emissions identified
from the event are included as an other
large release event or as another source
required to be reported under subpart
W. If the emissions identified via the
notification are not included in
emissions reported under subpart W, we
are proposing that the reporter provide
a reason (e.g., the location of the
emissions as provided in the
notification do not belong to the facility;
the emissions could not be verified or
corroborated during site inspection or
facility data records; information was
determined to not be credible and basis
for the determination). This information
would support EPA verification and
ensure accuracy of the emissions
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
reported under other large release
events.
As part of the GHGRP verification
process, the EPA reviews data provided
in submitted reports to identify
potential errors in the reported data
based on the different values reported
and the calculation methodology. The
EPA requests comment on the need to
establish additional requirements for
third-party notifiers and the verification
of third-party notifications. Generally,
verification of GHGRP reports is
conducted while a facility is entering
data into the e-GGRT system and after
the report is officially submitted. The
EPA requests comment on the need for
EPA verification support or an advance
verification process during the reporting
year for assessments of third-party
notifications. Currently, facilities with
questions about reporting requirements
submit inquiries via the e-GGRT Help
Desk to get questions answered
regarding monitoring or reporting
requirements. We request comment on
whether this existing process is
adequate for supporting questions
regarding individual third-party
notifications received by a reporter and
request suggestions on how the EPA
verification process could better support
the other large release event calculation
and reporting requirements.
The supplemental proposal for NSPS
OOOOb and EG OOOOc, as described in
section II of this preamble, included a
matrix for alternative screening
approaches for fugitive emissions from
well sites and compressor stations that
would allow the use of advanced
measurement technologies to detect
emissions under the proposed NSPS
OOOOb and EG OOOOc. As part of that
proposal, the EPA also requested
comment on how to evaluate and design
a requirement for owners and operators
to investigate and remediate large
emission events, which could include
the use of alternative screening
techniques and advanced measurement
technologies, all of which, if finalized,
could potentially be used to identify
‘‘other large release events’’ under
subpart W. While some methods that
could be used to identify and estimate
the magnitude of these ‘‘other large
release events,’’ such as monitors
installed on mobile vehicles or aircraft
or CH4 satellite imagery, would not be
specifically included as measurement
methods listed in 40 CFR 98.234 of
subpart W, these methods may be used
to quantify the emissions release for
‘‘other large release events’’ under the
‘‘engineering estimates’’ and ‘‘best
available data’’ provisions of the
proposed calculation methodology. To
improve the EPA’s understanding of the
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
technologies and methods used to
identify reported ‘‘other large release
events,’’ including the impact of
periodic screenings with advanced
measurement technologies on the
identification of large release events, we
are proposing reporting provisions that
would require reporters to indicate
whether each ‘‘other large release event’’
was identified as part of compliance
with NSPS OOOOb or the applicable
state plan or applicable Federal plan in
40 CFR part 62.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
C. New and Additional Emission
Sources
Sources of emissions that are required
to be reported to subpart W are listed in
40 CFR 98.232 for each industry
segment, with the methodology and
reporting requirements for each source
provided in 40 CFR 98.233 and 98.236,
respectively. The EPA finalized this list
of emission sources for each of the eight
original industry segments as part of the
2010 Final Rule and identified emission
sources for the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting and
Onshore Natural Gas Transmission
Pipeline industry segments when those
segments were added to subpart W in
2015 (80 FR 64262, October 22, 2015).
Per the TSD for the 2010 Final Rule
(hereafter referred to as the ‘‘2010
subpart W TSD’’),28 there were several
factors that impacted the EPA’s decision
on whether an emissions source should
be included for reporting. These factors
included how significant the
contribution of the source was to the
U.S. GHG Inventory, the type of
emission expected from the source
(vented versus fugitive), the best
practice monitoring methods available
to measure emissions from the source,
accessibility of the emission source,
geographical dispersion of the emission
source, and the applicability of
population versus leaker factors.
The EPA has evaluated the sources
covered under subpart W in comparison
with present-day inventories of the oil
and gas industry, such as the 2022 U.S.
GHG Inventory 29 and the American
Petroleum Institute (API) 2021
Compendium of Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Methodologies for the Natural
Gas and Oil Industry (2021 API
28 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting from the
Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems Industry:
Background Technical Support. November 2010.
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0923–3610;
also available in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
29 Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
and Sinks: 1990–2020. U.S. EPA. April 2022.
Available at https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/
inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks1990-2020 and in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
Compendium).30 The EPA also
reviewed stakeholder feedback,
including public comments from the
2022 Proposed Rule, on missing sources
of emissions from subpart W. As a
result, the EPA is proposing to add
several emission sources identified in
this review that are anticipated to have
a meaningful impact on reported
emissions, are commonplace in the oil
and gas industry, and/or have existing
emission calculation methodologies and
reporting provisions in the current
subpart W regulatory text. For some of
these emission sources, discussed in
additional detail in section III.C.1 of this
preamble, reporting is currently
required for some, but not all, industry
segments in which they exist. Other
proposed emission sources, discussed in
additional detail in sections III.C.2
through 5 of this preamble, are not
currently required to be reported for any
industry segments in which they exist.
The proposed addition of sources to
subpart W would be expected to
enhance the overall quality of the data
collected under the GHGRP and
improve the accuracy of total emissions
reported from facilities, consistent with
Congress’ direction in the IRA and
section II.A of this preamble.
The following sections detail the
proposed additions of emission sources
to subpart W.
1. Current Subpart W Emission Sources
Proposed for Additional Industry
Segments
Upon review of the U.S. GHG
Inventory and the 2021 API
Compendium, as well as other
publications,31 the EPA determined that
several of the emission sources included
in at least one industry segment in
subpart W are not currently required to
be reported by facilities in all the
industry segments in which those
sources exist. As such, consistent with
section II.A of this preamble, we are
proposing to add requirements to report
CO2, CH4, and nitrous oxide (N2O)
emissions (as applicable for the source
30 Compendium of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Methodologies For The Natural Gas And Oil
Industry. Produced by URS Corporation for
American Petroleum Institute. November 2021.
Available at https://www.api.org/-/media/files/
policy/esg/ghg/2021-api-ghg-compendium110921.pdf. Available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–
0234.
31 For example, American Petroleum Institute
(API). Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Operations
Consistent Methodology for Estimating Greenhouse
Gas Emissions. Prepared for API by The LEVON
Group, LLC. Version 1.0, May 2015. Available in
the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50301
type) from the following sources under
40 CFR 98.232 and 98.236(a): 32
• Onshore petroleum and natural gas
production: Blowdown vent stacks
• Onshore natural gas processing:
Natural gas pneumatic device venting,
Hydrocarbon liquids and produced
water storage tank emissions
• Onshore natural gas transmission
compression: Dehydrator vents
• Underground natural gas storage:
Dehydrator vents, Blowdown vent
stacks, Condensate storage tanks
• LNG storage: Blowdown vent stacks,
Acid gas removal unit vents
• LNG import and export equipment:
Acid gas removal unit vents
• Natural gas distribution: Natural gas
pneumatic device venting, Blowdown
vent stacks
• Onshore natural gas transmission
pipeline: Equipment leaks at
transmission company interconnect
metering-regulating stations,
Equipment leaks at farm tap and/or
direct sale metering-regulating
stations, Transmission pipeline
equipment leaks
We are also proposing several
revisions that would facilitate
implementation of the proposal to
require reporting of these emission
sources from additional industry
segments. We are proposing to revise
the name of the current emission source
type ‘‘onshore production and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting storage tanks’’ to ‘‘hydrocarbon
liquids and produced water storage
tanks’’ and revise ‘‘storage tank vented
emissions’’ to ‘‘hydrocarbon liquids and
produced water storage tank emissions’’
throughout subpart W. The proposed
removal of the reference to ‘‘onshore
production and onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting’’
would reflect a more appropriate name
corresponding to the proposed addition
of the reporting of these storage tank
emissions for the Onshore Natural Gas
Processing industry segment; the
addition of ‘‘produced water’’ to the
name is discussed in detail in section
III.C.3 of this preamble. Additionally,
we are proposing to revise the emission
source type name in 40 CFR 98.233(k)
and 98.236(k) from ‘‘transmission
storage tanks’’ to ‘‘condensate storage
tanks,’’ which would reflect a more
appropriate name corresponding to the
proposed addition of the reporting of
these storage tank emissions for the
32 It should be noted that the EPA did not identify
any subpart W emission sources missing from the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and
Boosting industry segment.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50302
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
Underground Natural Gas Storage
industry segment.33
We are also proposing revisions to the
calculation methodologies and/or
emissions reporting structure for each of
these emission source/industry segment
combinations that would be needed in
40 CFR 98.233 and 98.236, respectively.
For industry segments for which we are
proposing to additionally require
reporting of emissions from AGR vents,
dehydrator vents, hydrocarbon liquids
and produced water storage tank
emissions, and condensate storage tank
emissions, we are proposing that
reporters would use the same
calculation methods and report the
same information as reporters in the
industry segments in which those
source types are already reported. For
these sources, the EPA is not aware of
differences in the operation of the
emission sources between industry
segments that would necessitate
separate calculation methodologies. The
remainder of this section describes
additional proposed amendments to 40
CFR 98.233.
For the proposed addition of natural
gas pneumatic device venting as an
emission source for the Onshore Natural
Gas Processing industry segment, we are
proposing that those facilities would use
the proposed calculation methodologies
as described in section III.E of this
preamble. For any reporters to the
Onshore Natural Gas Processing
industry segment that would use
proposed Calculation Methodology 3,
the emission factors we are proposing
are the same as the proposed revised
emission factors for the Onshore Natural
Gas Transmission Compression and
Underground Natural Gas Storage
industry segments. As noted in the
subpart W TSD (available in the docket),
the data available to develop emission
factors for the Onshore Natural Gas
Processing industry segment are limited,
and because operations defined as being
part of these three industry segments are
similar and can occur at the same
facilities, the EPA has historically
applied the same population and leaker
emission factors to these three segments
(e.g., equipment leaks). See section III.E
of this preamble for additional details
about the proposed calculation
methodologies.
As noted earlier in this section, we are
proposing to add blowdown vent stack
reporting to the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production, Underground
Natural Gas Storage, LNG Storage, and
Natural Gas Distribution industry
33 Revisions are also proposed to 40 CFR
98.232(e)(3) to reference the source as ‘‘condensate
storage tanks.’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
segments. Subpart W currently requires
reporting of blowdowns either using
flow meter measurements (existing 40
CFR 98.233(i)(3)) or using unique
physical volume calculations by
equipment or event types (existing 40
CFR 98.233(i)(2)). There are two lists of
equipment or event types. One applies
to the Onshore Natural Gas Processing,
Onshore Natural Gas Transmission
Compression, LNG Import and Export
Equipment, and Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
segments (proposed 40 CFR
98.233(i)(2)(iv)(A), as discussed in
section III.J.2 of this preamble). The
other list of equipment or event types
(in proposed 40 CFR 98.233(i)(2)(iv)(B),
as discussed in section III.J.2 of this
preamble) was developed for the
Onshore Natural Gas Transmission
Pipeline industry segment when that
segment was added to subpart W in
2015 (80 FR 64275, October 22, 2015).
To allow reporters in the new industry
segments to calculate emissions by
equipment or event types, the EPA is
proposing to specify the appropriate list
of equipment or event types. We are
proposing that facilities in the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production,
Underground Natural Gas Storage, and
LNG Storage industry segments
following the methodology in 40 CFR
98.233(i)(2) would be required to
categorize blowdown vent stack
emission events into the seven
categories provided in proposed 40 CFR
98.233(i)(2)(iv)(A), as the types of
blowdown vent stack emission events
for these segments are similar to those
for the segments currently required to
categorize under this provision.
We are proposing that facilities in the
Natural Gas Distribution industry
segment would be required to categorize
blowdowns into the eight categories
listed in proposed 40 CFR
98.233(i)(2)(iv)(B), as the types of
blowdowns that occur in the Natural
Gas Distribution industry segment are
expected to be pipeline blowdowns
similar to those in the Onshore Natural
Gas Transmission Pipeline industry
segment. We note that during the early
stages of our review of potential new
sources, we considered whether to add
emissions from mishaps (dig-ins) in the
Natural Gas Distribution industry
segment as a new emission source.
However, mishaps (dig-ins) are already
included on the list of equipment and
event types in proposed 40 CFR
98.233(i)(2)(iv)(B), specifically
emergency shutdowns including
pipeline incidents as defined in 49 CFR
191.3. Therefore, a proposed
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
amendment is not necessary to include
those events.
We are proposing one other
amendment related to the calculation of
emissions from blowdown vent stacks.
The EPA previously determined that for
reporters in the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segment using the
methodology provided in existing 40
CFR 98.233(i)(2) and equation W–14A,
it is reasonable to allow engineering
estimates based on best available
information when determining
temperature and pressure for emergency
blowdowns, due to the geographically
dispersed nature of the facilities in this
industry segment. As discussed in
section III.J.3 of this preamble, we are
proposing to also allow engineering
estimates based on best available
information when determining
temperature and pressure for emergency
blowdowns for the Onshore Natural Gas
Transmission Pipeline industry
segment, as facilities in this industry
segment are also geographically
dispersed. Due to the fact that facilities
in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural
Gas Production and Natural Gas
Distribution industry segments are
similarly geographically dispersed, we
are proposing that reporters in those
industry segments using the
methodology provided in 40 CFR
98.233(i)(2) and equation W–14A would
also be allowed to use engineering
estimates based on best available
information available when determining
temperature and pressure for emergency
blowdowns.
For the Onshore Natural Gas
Transmission Pipeline industry
segment, as noted earlier in this section,
we are proposing to add reporting of
emissions from equipment leaks from
transmission pipelines, transmission
company interconnect meteringregulating stations, and farm tap and/or
direct sale stations. The EPA proposes
to add these sources to the calculation
methodologies provided in 40 CFR
98.233(r), with associated proposed
updates to the variable definitions in
equation W–32A to include components
in the Onshore Natural Gas
Transmission Pipeline industry
segment. We are also proposing to add
default CH4 population emission factors
for the components specified in this
paragraph at facilities in the Onshore
Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline
industry segment in proposed Table W–
5 of subpart W. The EPA derived these
proposed emission factors from the 1996
Gas Research Institute (GRI)/EPA study
Methane Emissions from the Natural
Gas Industry (hereafter referred to as
‘‘the 1996 GRI/EPA study’’), specifically
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Volumes 9 and 10.34 The precise
derivation of the proposed emission
factors is discussed in more detail in the
subpart W TSD, available in the docket
for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234. We are
proposing that emissions from these
components would be reported using
population emission factors, as we are
not aware of any currently available
information or data that could be used
to develop leaker emission factors from
transmission pipelines, transmission
company interconnect meteringregulating stations, or farm tap and/or
direct sale stations. We are seeking
comments on whether there are study
data available which could be used to
develop default leaker factors whereby
subpart W could include the use of
equipment leak surveys, default
component-specific leaker emission
factors, and the calculation method in
40 CFR 98.233(q) an as option for
transmission pipeline facilities to
quantify emissions from transmission
company interconnect meteringregulating stations, or farm tap and/or
direct sale stations. Similarly, we are
seeking comment on whether an option
to survey components at transmission
company interconnect meteringregulating stations, or farm tap and/or
direct sale stations using the existing
methods in subpart W in 40 CFR 98.234
(e.g., EPA Method 21, optical gas
imaging (OGI)) and directly measuring
and reporting emissions consistent with
proposed 40 CFR 98.233(q)(3) should be
provided; or whether a methodology in
which a multi-year leak survey cycle
and the application of either default
emission factors or measurements used
with the methods provided in 40 CFR
98.233(q) should be provided analogous
to the methodology provided for above
grade transmission-distribution transfer
stations should be provided. We are
specifically interested in comments on
which approach would be preferred and
the supporting rationale.
Separately, concerning the
quantification of emissions from
transmission pipelines, we are seeking
comments on alternative methods for
surveying for equipment leaks as well as
quantifying and reporting emissions
from these emission sources. We are
specifically interested in what survey
34 Methane Emissions from the Natural Gas
Industry, Volume 9: Underground Pipelines, Final
Report (GRI–94/0257.26 and EPA–600/R–96–080i)
and Volume 10: Metering and Pressure Regulating
Stations in Natural Gas Transmission and
Distribution, Final Report (GRI–94/0257.27 and
EPA–600/R–96–080j). Gas Research Institute and
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. June 1996.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
techniques would be appropriate and
why, including supporting information
on specific instruments and their
detection capabilities and whether
certain methods would be more suitable
for the survey of pipeline leaks than
others. We are also seeking comment on
what quantification techniques would
be best suited for measuring emissions
from pipeline leaks and whether these
techniques require digging down to the
pipeline in order to quantify emissions
and also verify pipeline characteristics.
As an example, the EPA performed a
review of recent study data (Weller et al.
2020) that used an alternative
technology, namely AMLD, for the
purposes of performing surveys to
identify leaks and as a method to
quantify emissions from pipeline leaks.
For the reasons discussed in section
III.Q.2 of this preamble and discussed in
more detail in the subpart W TSD,
available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2023–0234, we are not proposing
amendments based on that study or use
of that technology. Instead, we are
seeking comment on the scope and
frequency of leak detection surveys and
measurements for transmission
pipelines. We are considering whether
we should require annual surveys of the
entire pipeline system or whether a
reduced frequency of survey (i.e., partial
surveys over a multi-year survey cycle
in which the entire system is surveyed
during the survey cycle and
approximately equal portions of the
system are surveyed each year of the
multi-year survey cycle) is more
appropriate and why. Finally, we are
seeking comment on whether facilities
should be permitted to develop facilityspecific pipeline emission factors based
on direct measurements and if so, what
the appropriate number of
measurements should be for
determining a representative emission
factor for each pipeline material
including supporting rationale.
2. Nitrogen Removal Units
The EPA is proposing to revise
existing 40 CFR 98.232, 98.233(d), and
98.236(d) to add calculation and
reporting requirements for CH4
emissions from nitrogen removal units
used in the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production, Onshore
Natural Gas Processing, Onshore
Petroleum Natural Gas Gathering and
Boosting, LNG Storage, and LNG Import
and Export Equipment industry
segments. Nitrogen removal units
remove nitrogen from the raw natural
gas stream to meet pipeline
requirements and for compressing
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50303
natural gas into LNG.35 36 The nitrogen
removal unit typically follows in series
after other process units that remove
acid gas (e.g., CO2, hydrogen sulfide),
water, and heavy hydrocarbons. It is
estimated that 11 percent of current
daily production and 16 percent of
known gas reserves in the U.S. contain
some nitrogen.37 Methane emissions
from nitrogen removal units occur from
the vent and as fugitives. A nitrogen
removal unit separates the nitrogen gas
from the CH4 resulting in an outlet CH4
stream that contains approximately 2 to
5 percent nitrogen38 and an outlet
nitrogen stream that can contain 1 to 5
percent CH4 (EPA 2005).39 Optimization
of the nitrogen removal unit can reduce
CH4 in the outlet nitrogen stream to 2
percent (EPA 2005) and even to 1
percent CH4 by volume.40 The EPA
GasSTAR program already accounts for
CH4 emissions from nitrogen removal
unit vents and fugitives.
Based upon a 2002 field study
conducted at four natural gas processing
plants,41 the EPA estimates that
emissions from nitrogen removal unit
vents that would be reported to the
GHGRP would be approximately 2,400
mt CH4 per year. For more information
on the estimation of potential CH4
emissions from nitrogen removal unit
venting see the subpart W TSD,
available in the docket for this
35 Kuo, J.C., K.H. Wang, C. Chen. Pros and cons
of different Nitrogen Removal Unit (NRU)
technology. 7 (2012) 52–59. Journal of Natural Gas
Science and Engineering. July 2012. Available in
the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
36 Park, J., D. Cho. Decision methodology for
nitrogen removal process in the LNG plant using
analytic hierarchy process. Journal of Industrial and
Engineering Chemistry. 37 (2016) 75–83. 2016.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
37 Kuo 2012.
38 Weidert, D.J., and R.B. Hopewell. Holding the
Key. Hydrocarbon Engineering. August 2016.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
39 EPA 2005. Optimizing Nitrogen Rejection
Units, Lessons Learned from Natural Gas STAR.
Gas Processors Association, Devon Energy, Enogex,
Dynegy Midstream Services, and EPA’s Natural Gas
STAR Program. Presented at Processors Technology
Transfer Workshop. April 22, 2005. Available in the
docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
40 Nitrogen Rejection Unit Optimization, PRO
Fact Sheet No. 905. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Partner Reported Opportunities (PROs) for
Reducing Methane Emissions. 2011. Available in
the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
41 Identification and Evaluation of Opportunities
to Reduce Methane Losses at Four Gas Processing
Plants. Prepared for Gas Technology Institute under
U.S. EPA Grant No. 827754–01–0. Clearstone
Engineering. June 20, 2002. Available in the docket
for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
2023–0234.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50304
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2023–0234.
The EPA is proposing to define
‘‘nitrogen removal unit’’ in 40 CFR
98.238 as a process unit that separates
nitrogen from natural gas using various
separation processes (e.g., cryogenic
units, membrane units) and ‘‘nitrogen
removal unit vent emissions’’ as the
nitrogen gas separated from the natural
gas and released with CH4 and other
gases to the atmosphere, flare, or other
combustion unit. The EPA is proposing
to amend 40 CFR 98.232(c)(17),
98.232(d)(5), 98.232(g)(10), 98.232(h)(9),
and 98.232(j)(3) to add nitrogen removal
unit vents to the list of source types for
which the industry segments previously
specified would be required to report
emissions. Corresponding additions are
proposed at 40 CFR 98.236(a) to add
nitrogen removal units to the list of
equipment and activities that would be
reported for each of these industry
segments.
The EPA is proposing CH4 emission
calculation methodologies for nitrogen
removal units that are identical to the
existing calculation methodologies in 40
CFR 98.233(d) for AGRs (which
currently apply to calculating emissions
of CO2). These methods include use of
vent meters, engineering calculations
based upon flowrate of gas streams, or
calculation using simulation software.
Further, the EPA is proposing to add
relevant reporting elements for CH4
emissions from nitrogen removal units
to 40 CFR 98.236(d) for each of the
proposed allowable calculation
methodologies. As a part of this
proposed rulemaking, the EPA is also
proposing to require the reporting of
CH4 emissions from AGR vents. Refer to
section III.F.1 of this preamble for more
detailed discussion of the calculation
methodologies, including additional
revisions proposed as part of this
rulemaking and which we propose
would also apply to nitrogen removal
units.
The EPA is proposing that nitrogen
removal unit vents routed to a flare
would follow the same calculation
requirements as other flared emission
source types in proposed 40 CFR
98.233(n) and that flared nitrogen
removal unit emissions (CO2, CH4, and
N2O) would be reported under proposed
40 CFR 98.236(n) separately from
vented nitrogen removal unit emissions
(CH4). The flared nitrogen removal unit
emissions would be included with
‘‘other’’ flared source types for purposes
of the proposed disaggregation
provisions in proposed 40 CFR
98.233(n)(10) and proposed 40 CFR
98.236(n)(19). See section III.N of this
preamble for more information on the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
proposed flaring calculation and
reporting provisions.
The EPA is seeking comment on the
proposal to require reporting of CH4
emissions from nitrogen removal unit
venting, including the estimated
magnitude of emissions, which industry
segments, if any, should be required to
report nitrogen removal unit vent
emissions, and whether the existing
calculation methods for AGR vents are
appropriate and if there are other
methods the EPA should consider.
3. Produced Water Tanks
The EPA is proposing to add CH4
emissions from produced water tanks to
subpart W. The EPA is proposing to
define ‘‘produced water’’ consistent
with the definition in the effluent
guidelines for the oil and gas extraction
point source category (40 CFR
435.11(bb)), which is the water (brine)
brought up from the hydrocarbonbearing strata during the extraction of
oil and gas, and can include formation
water, injection water, and any
chemicals added downhole or during
the oil/water separation process.
Produced water is the largest
wastewater source by volume generated
during oil and gas extraction.42 The
ratio of produced water to recovered
hydrocarbon is extremely variable
across the U.S., ranging from less than
1:1 to more than 100:1.43 In the 2022
U.S. GHG Inventory emissions estimate
for 2020, the EPA estimated
approximately 140,300 mt CH4
emissions from produced water tanks
associated with natural gas wells and
88,600 mt CH4 emissions from produced
water tanks associated with oil wells.
The EPA is proposing amendments to
40 CFR 98.233(j) to require reporters
with atmospheric pressure storage tanks
receiving produced water to calculate
CH4 emissions using any of the three
calculation methodologies specified in
40 CFR 98.233(j)(1) through (3).44 For
facilities with produced water storage
tanks electing to model their CH4
emissions consistent with 40 CFR
98.233(j)(1), the EPA is proposing to
allow facilities to select any software
option that meets the requirements
currently stated in 40 CFR 98.233(j)(1)
42 Summary of Input on Oil and Gas Extraction
Wastewater Management Practices Under the Clean
Water Act. Final Report. EPA–821–S19–001. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Engineering and
Analysis Division, Office of Water. Washington, DC
May 2020.
43 Ibid.
44 As part of the proposed amendment to require
reporters to calculate and report emissions from
produced water tanks, we are also proposing
conforming edits throughout subpart W to refer to
hydrocarbon liquids and produced water instead of
just hydrocarbon liquids.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(i.e., to select a modeling software that
uses the Peng-Robinson equation of
state, models flashing emissions from
produced water, and speciates CH4
emissions that result when the
produced water from the separator or
non-separator equipment enters an
atmospheric pressure storage tank), but
we request comment on whether the
Peng-Robinson equation of state should
be used for produced water tanks and
whether there are other parameters that
should be considered requirements for
modeling emissions from produced
water tanks. We expect that modeling
flashing emissions from produced water
tanks would calculate accurate
estimates of CH4 emissions, as it is
widely accepted that these models
provide accurate estimates of flashing
emissions from hydrocarbon liquids
atmospheric storage tanks. Therefore,
we expect process simulation software
options such as Bryan Research &
Engineering (BRE)’s ProMax® 45
(ProMax) would be appropriate for
modeling produced water CH4
emissions. For example, BRE has
produced a white paper regarding
ProMax’s accuracy in predicting
produced water emissions.46 However,
per the 2021 API Compendium, the EPA
is aware that API 4697 E&P Tanks v3.0
program 47 is not appropriate for
determining emissions from produced
water tanks, as the program’s
methodology is based on properties
specific to crude oil. Given that API’s
E&P Tanks software cannot model
produced water tanks, we are proposing
to specifically state in 40 CFR
98.233(j)(1) that API’s E&P Tanks should
only be used for modeling atmospheric
storage tanks receiving hydrocarbon
liquids.
There are several documents that
address produced water emissions;
however, the emission factors used in
all of these documents all ultimately
trace back to the 1996 GRI/EPA study.48
45 BRE Promax® software available from BRE
website (https://www.bre.com/).
46 Are Produced Water Emission Factors
Accurate? Bryan Research & Engineering, Inc.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
47 E&P Tanks v3.0 software and the user guide
(Publication 4697) formerly available from the API
website.
48 Studies referencing the 1996 GRI/EPA study
produced water emission factors include: (1) 2021
API Compendium; (2) Oil & Gas Production
Protocol, Annex II to the General Reporting
Protocol, Version 1.0. The Climate Registry.
February 2010; (3) 2011 Oil and Gas Emission
Inventory Enhancement Project for CenSARA
States. Produced by ENVIRON International
Corporation and Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG)
for Central States Air Resources Agencies
(CenSARA). December 2012; and (4) Instructions for
Using the 2017 EPA Nonpoint Oil and Gas
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Therefore, the EPA is proposing to add
CH4 emission factors to 40 CFR
98.233(j)(3) that were developed as part
of the 1996 GRI/EPA study,49 which is
consistent with the factors used by the
U.S. GHG Inventory.50 The emission
estimates from the 1996 GRI/EPA study
were estimated using an ASPEN PLUS
process simulation assuming the natural
gas industry produces 497 million
barrels of salt water annually, including
approximately 100 million barrels from
coal bed CH4 wells; 70 percent of the
water from gas wells is reinjected with
the remaining 30 percent stored in
atmospheric tanks; and hydrocarbon
composition is 100 percent CH4.51 The
1996 GRI/EPA study estimated
produced water emissions for salt
contents of 2, 10, and 20 percent, and
pressures of 50, 250, and 1,000 pounds
per square inch. The 2021 API
Compendium (Table 6–26) provides the
1996 GRI/EPA emission factors
converted from units of million pounds
per year to units of metric tons per
thousand barrels (based upon the
assumption of 497 million barrels of
produced water annual production). In
addition, average emission factors were
calculated for each pressure.
We also propose to add reporting
requirements for produced water tanks.
The provisions in 40 CFR 98.236(j)(1)
are proposed to be revised to refer to
both hydrocarbon liquid and produced
water atmospheric storage tanks.
Additionally, we are proposing to add
reporting requirements to 40 CFR
98.236(j)(2) for total annual produced
water volumes for each pressure range,
estimates of the fraction of produced
water throughput that is controlled by
flares and/or vapor recovery, counts of
controlled and uncontrolled produced
water tanks, and annual CH4 emissions
vented directly to atmosphere from
produced water tanks. Flared produced
water tank emissions would be reported
Emissions Estimation Tool, Production Module.
Produced by Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG) for
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. October
2019.
49 Methane Emissions from the Natural Gas
Industry, Volume 6: Vented and Combustion Source
Summary, Final Report. GRI–94/0257.23 and EPA–
600/R–96–080f. Gas Research Institute and U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. June 1996.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
50 U.S. EPA. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas
Emissions and Sinks 1990–2019: Updates for
Produced Water Emissions. April 2021. Available in
the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
51 Atlas of Gas Related Produced Water for 1990.
95/0016. Produced by Energy Environmental
Research Center, University of North Dakota, and
ENSR Consulting and Engineering for Gas Research
Institute. May 1995. Available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–
0234.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
under 40 CFR 98.236(n), as proposed in
section III.N.2 of this preamble. Industry
segments required to report emissions
from produced water tanks would
include Onshore Petroleum and Natural
Gas Production, Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting,
and Onshore Natural Gas Processing.
The EPA is also proposing to revise the
emission source type name in 40 CFR
98.233(j) and 40 CFR 98.236(j) from
‘‘onshore production and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting storage tanks’’ to ‘‘hydrocarbon
liquids and produced water storage
tanks’’ to reflect the proposed addition
of produced water tanks. The EPA is
also proposing to revise the source type
provided in 40 CFR 98.232(c)(10) and 40
CFR 98.232(j)(6) to ‘‘Hydrocarbon liquid
and produced water storage tank
emissions’’ which reflects the addition
of produced water tanks.
4. Mud Degassing
The EPA is proposing to add a new
emission source type to subpart W for
emissions from drilling mud degassing.
The proposed amendments for this new
source type would add calculation and
reporting requirements for CH4
emissions from mud degassing
associated with well drilling for onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
facilities in 40 CFR 98.232(c),
98.233(dd), and 98.236(dd). In this
proposal, the EPA is not proposing to
require the reporting of CO2 emissions
from this source. Based on available
research, it appears that CH4 is the
primary GHG emitted from this source,
while emissions of CO2 are expected to
be very small. However, as noted later
in this section, the EPA is seeking
comment on requiring reporting of CO2
emissions from mud degassing,
including comment on the expected
magnitude of CO2 emissions from mud
degassing and appropriate calculation
methods for CO2 emissions from mud
degassing.
The term ‘‘drilling mud,’’ also referred
to as ‘‘drilling fluid,’’ refers to a class of
viscous fluids used during the drilling
of oil and gas wells. Throughout the
drilling process, drilling mud is
pumped continuously through the drill
string and out the bit to cool and
lubricate the drill bit, carry cuttings
away from the drill bit, and to maintain
the desired pressure within the well.
The three types of drilling mud used in
the oil and gas industry are water-based,
oil-based, and synthetic-based muds.
The density of the mud can be
controlled to counteract formation
pressure, and drilling mud adds
stability to the bore hole. During
drilling, gas is freed from rock drilled
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50305
out of the wellbore and becomes
entrained in the drilling mud that is
being pumped continuously through the
drill string.
As drilling mud circulates through the
wellbore, natural gas and heavier
hydrocarbons can become entrained in
the mud. Mud degassing refers to the
practice of extracting the entrained gas
from drilling mud once it is outside the
wellbore. Gas entrained in the drilling
mud is separated from the mud in a
mud separator and then vented directly
to the atmosphere or flared. The
entrained gas contains CH4 and can
contain other pollutants such as volatile
organic compounds (VOC) and possibly
CO2, depending on the gas
characteristics of the hydrocarbonbearing zones through which the
borehole is drilled, including the target
zone. Although the majority of natural
gas will be released when the mud
passes through the mud separator, small
quantities of natural gas will remain
entrained in the drilling mud and in the
rock cuttings after the mud passes
through the traps. These small
quantities will eventually be released to
the atmosphere as the drilling mud and
associated cuttings are stored, processed
and disposed.
Based on our review of the available
information regarding mud degassing
emissions, we note that mud degassing
has been included only in a limited
number of U.S. state-level, regional and
national inventories of the onshore oil
and gas production segments, mostly
due to a lack of sufficient data to
characterize the emissions. In a 1977
EPA publication titled, Atmospheric
Emissions from Offshore Oil and Gas
Development and Production,52 the EPA
estimated two total hydrocarbon (THC)
emission factors in units of emissions
per drilling day, one for water-based
mud degassing and the other for oilbased mud degassing, based on
engineering calculations. The 1977 EPA
publication does not include emission
factors for synthetic-based mud. Several
entities, such as the state of New York
and the Central States Air Resources
Agency (CenSARA), have incorporated
estimates for mud degassing in their
inventory estimates. A CenSARA study
conducted in 2011 developed default
emission factors derived from the 1977
EPA report.53 The CenSARA study
52 Atmospheric Emissions from Offshore Oil and
Gas Development and Production. Produced by
Energy Resources Co. for Environmental Protection
Agency. Available in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
53 2011 Oil and Gas Emission Inventory
Enhancement Project for CenSARA States.
Produced by ENVIRON International Corporation
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
Continued
01AUP2
50306
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
added a THC emission factor for
synthetic drilling muds and also
provided emission factors in mt CH4 per
drilling day. The THC emission factors
are 881.84 pounds per drilling day for
water-based muds and 198.41 pounds
per drilling day for oil-based and
synthetic drilling muds. The CH4specific emission factors are 0.2605 mt
CH4 per drilling day for water-based
muds and 0.0586 mt per drilling day for
oil-based and synthetic drilling muds;
they are based on an assumption of
83.85 percent CH4 in the gas stream
vented from mud degassing. The
CenSARA methodology does allow for
adjustment of the CH4 default emission
factors to local conditions by
multiplying the nationwide emission
factor to the ratio of the local CH4 mole
percent of vented gas to the mole
percent of CH4 from the vented gas used
to derive the CenSARA emission factor
(83.85).
For its emissions inventory, the state
of New York based its emission factor
for mud degassing on the CenSARA
study, while also concluding that
communication with experts indicated
that there were not any more recent
estimates available.54 Furthermore, New
York only adopted the CenSARA CH4
emission factor of 0.2605 mt CH4 per
drilling day for water-based muds. This
factor serves as the single emission
factor for New York. Unlike CenSARA,
New York’s calculation methods do not
provide the ability for users to make a
local adjustment to the emission factor.
Both CenSARA and New York define
the number of drilling days as the
completion date minus the spud date.
The U.S. GHG Inventory does not
currently include mud degassing
emissions. In 2020, the EPA released a
memorandum discussing the potential
inclusion of CH4 emissions estimates for
mud degassing as an update under
consideration for the U.S. GHG
Inventory, based on the THC emission
factors presented in the 1977 EPA
publication.55 Specifically, the
for Central States Air Resources Agencies.
November 2011. Available at https://
www.deq.ok.gov/wp-content/uploads/air-division/
EI_OG_Final_Report_CenSara_122712.pdf and in
the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
54 New York State Oil and Gas Sector: Methane
Emissions Inventory. Produced by Abt Associates
for New York State Energy Research and
Development Authority. November 2022. Available
at https://www.nyserda.ny.gov/-/media/Project/
Nyserda/Files/Publications/Energy-Analysis/22-38New-York-State-Oil-and-Gas-Sector-MethaneReport-acc.pdf and in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–
0234.
55 U.S. EPA. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas
Emissions and Sinks 1990–2019: Update under
Consideration for Mud Degassing Emissions.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
memorandum provided emission factors
of 0.32 mt CH4 per drilling day for
water-based drilling muds and 0.07 mt
CH4 per drilling day for oil-based
drilling muds in the discussion. The
CH4 emission factor presented for
consideration for updating the U.S. GHG
Inventory assumed a default CH4
fraction (by weight) of 61.2 percent for
associated gas. The EPA has not to date
incorporated the use of these emission
factors, and mud degassing is not
included in the current U.S. GHG
Inventory.
Separately, API published updated
CH4 and whole gas emission factors
based on the emission factors from the
1977 EPA publication in their 2021 API
Compendium.56 API’s updated CH4
emission factors are based on a gas
content of 65.13 weight percent CH4,
derived from sample data provided in
the 1977 EPA publication. While
including the same THC and CH4
emission factors as CenSARA, API
specifies that these are for offshore
drilling only. The API Compendium
presents lower emission factors for
onshore drilling. In the 2021 API
Compendium, API stated that it
adjusted the 1977 EPA values for
borehole size and porosity to better
reflect those used in onshore drilling.
API’s onshore production CH4 emission
factors are 0.0458 mt per drilling day for
water-based mud and 0.0103 mt per
drilling day for oil-based and synthetic
muds. Similar to CenSARA, the API
methodology allows for the nationwide
emission factors to be adjusted to local
conditions by applying a ratio of the
mole percent in vented gas from
degassing at local operations to the
nationwide mole percent of 83.85.
Although most efforts have focused
on the development of emission factors
for mud degassing, the 2021 API
Compendium also encourages operators
to use site-specific CH4 (and CO2 if
present) measurements to estimate
emissions if possible. Generally,
measured data would involve use of
mud-logger services with hydrocarbon
gas sensors. In some cases, operators
may use gas chromatography, but gas
chromatography alone does not allow
calculation of gas concentration in the
September 2020. Available at https://www.epa.gov/
sites/default/files/2020-09/documents/ghgiwebinar2020-degassing.pdf and in the docket for
this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
2023–0234.
56 Compendium of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Methodologies For The Natural Gas And Oil
Industry. Produced by URS Corporation for
American Petroleum Institute. November 2021.
Available at https://www.api.org/-/media/files/
policy/esg/ghg/2021-api-ghg-compendium110921.pdf and in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
mud. Gas emissions would be
determined by using the volumetric
flowrate of the mud, the amount of time
of mud flow and the concentration of
CH4 and CO2 in the mud.
After careful consideration of the
available literature and well drilling and
mud degassing practices, the EPA is
proposing two options in a new
paragraph (40 CFR 98.233(dd)) to
measure CH4 emissions from drilling
mud degassing: use of measurements
taken through mudlogging and gas
detection at representative wells and
use of emission factors and activity
counts.
Calculation Method 1 would require
the reporter to calculate CH4 emissions
from mud degassing for a representative
well. To qualify as a representative well,
the well would be required to be drilled
in the same sub-basin and at the same
targeted total depth from the surface as
the wells it is representative of.
Calculation Method 1 would be required
to be used when the reporter has taken
mudlogging measurements, including
gas trap-derived gas concentration and
mud pumping rate, for at least one well
in the sub-basin at the approximate total
depth. A CH4 emissions rate from mud
degassing would be calculated for the
representative well and the CH4
emission rate for the well would be
applied to the total time drilling mud is
circulated through the wellbore during
drilling for each of the other wells
drilled in the same sub-basin and
targeting the same approximate total
depth from surface in the reporting year.
The operator would be required to
identify and calculate natural gas
emissions for a new representative well
at least once every 2 years for each subbasin and targeted depth within the
facility to ensure that the emissions
from representative wells are
representative of the operating and
drilling practices within each applicable
sub-basin in the facility. In the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production
industry segment, facilities are defined
at the basin-level. In the first year of
reporting, however, the operator may
use measurements from the prior
reporting year if measurements from the
current reporting year are not available.
Proposed Calculation Method 1 uses a
three-step approach to calculate
emissions from mud degassing for each
well in a particular sub-basin and at the
same approximate total targeted depth.
In the first step, reporters would
calculate CH4 emissions for the
representative well using proposed
equation W–41. For this step, the
reporter would need to know the
average efflux mud rate from the mud
pump in gallons per minute (gpm),
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
‘‘MRr’’; the total amount of time in
minutes that drilling mud is circulated
in the representative well, ‘‘Tr’’; the
percentage of the fluid flow that is gas,
‘‘Xn’’; and the measured mole
concentration of CH4, ‘‘GHGCH4.’’ If a
representative well cannot be identified
because mudlogging was not used for
any well within the same sub-basin and
at the same targeted approximate total
depth, the reporter may choose a
representative well within the facility
that is drilled into the same formation
and at the same approximate total
depth.
In the second step, reporters would
calculate the CH4 emissions rate for the
representative well using proposed
equation W–42. The emissions rate
would be derived by dividing the
representative well’s total annual CH4
emissions, ‘‘Es,CH4,r,’’ by the total time
that drilling mud is circulated in the
representative well, ‘‘Tr.’’ In the third
step, reporters would apply the CH4
emissions rate calculated in the second
step to other wells in the sub-basin that
are at the same approximate total depth
to derive the total volume of CH4
emissions for each well at that depth. In
this step, the reporter would calculate
total CH4 emissions for each well, ‘‘p,’’
in the same sub-basin and at the same
approximate total depth as the
representative well using proposed
equation W–43, where the total time
drilling mud is circulated in the well
would be multiplied by the
representative well’s emissions rate,
‘‘ERs,CH4,p,’’ determined using equation
W–42 in step 2.
If mudlogging measurements were not
taken, the EPA is proposing that
reporters would use Calculation Method
2 and determine emissions from mud
degassing using proposed equation W–
44, which incorporates the nationwide
emission factors provided by the
CenSARA study. Specifically, the EPA
is proposing an emission factor of
0.2605 mt CH4 per drilling day per well
for water-based mud and a factor of
0.0586 mt CH4 per drilling day per well
for oil-based and synthetic drilling
muds. As noted by New York state,
there are limited data and few studies
on mud degassing emissions. The EPA
is proposing these emission factors as an
alternative calculation method because
our assessment of the available
literature is that these proposed
emission factors are generally
appropriate if measurements are not
available. In addition, the emission
factors proposed are consistent with
those of several organizations that
calculate and publish emissions from
mud degassing in their inventories. As
noted previously in this section, these
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
factors are based on a CH4 mole percent
of 83.85 in the gas stream vented from
mud degassing. The EPA is not
proposing to allow adjustment of the
emission factors for local conditions
under proposed Calculation Method 2
because the use of emission factors
under this proposed calculation method
would only be allowed if the operator
did not have site-specific measurements
(i.e., would not have the measurement
that would be the basis of such an
adjustment).
Although the EPA is proposing to use
the nationwide emission factors
provided by the CenSARA study, the
EPA is proposing to define the number
of drilling days differently than the
study. Rather than considering the first
drilling day to be the day the well is
spudded, we are proposing that the total
number of drilling days is the sum of all
days from the first day that the borehole
penetrates the first hydrocarbon-bearing
zone through the completion of all
drilling activity. The EPA believes that
penetration of the first hydrocarbonbearing zone more accurately reflects
the point in time where CH4 will start
becoming entrained in drilling mud.
The EPA is also defining the last drilling
day as the day drilling mud ceases to be
circulated in the well. Reporters would
calculate emissions for each well by
multiplying the emission factor by the
number of drilling days per well per
year.
The EPA is seeking comment on these
calculation methodologies, including
whether there are calculation
methodologies other than the proposed
methods that the EPA should consider
for calculating CH4 emissions from mud
degassing. The EPA is also seeking
comment on CO2 emissions from mud
degassing, including the magnitude of
CO2 emissions from this source type,
whether emissions of CO2 should be
reported, and suggested calculation
methods for CO2 emissions. The EPA is
also seeking comment on whether to
consider mud weight balance in the
derivation of emission factors, and if so,
how to incorporate such considerations.
Underbalanced, balanced, and
overbalanced all lead to varying
hydrostatic weights of the mud and
could affect the flow of hydrocarbons
into the well bore, possibly impacting
emissions calculations. However, we are
not aware of any studies to date that
have considered mud weight balance.
In addition to the calculation
requirements, the EPA is proposing
corresponding reporting requirements
for emissions by well in 40 CFR
98.236(dd). Specifically, for all wells
with mud degassing emissions that use
Calculation Method 1, the reporter
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50307
would report the well ID number for
each well for which mud degassing
emissions are calculated, the
approximate total depth of the well in
feet below surface, and the total time in
minutes that drilling mud is circulated
in the well. Reporters would also report
whether the drilling mud used was
water-based, oil-based, or synthetic.
Additionally, for a well that is not a
representative well, reporters would
report the well ID number of the
representative well that was used to
derive the CH4 emissions rate used to
calculate emissions from the nonrepresentative well.
For reporters using Calculation
Method 1, the EPA is also proposing to
require additional data on
representative wells, including the
average mud flow rate in gpm, the
concentration of natural gas in the
drilling mud, the measured mole
fraction of CH4 in the drilling mud, and
the CH4 emissions rate. For reporters
using Calculation Method 2, the EPA is
proposing that reporters would report
the well ID number for each well for
which mud degassing emissions are
calculated, the total number of drilling
days at each well, and whether the
drilling mud used was water-based, oilbased, or synthetic. Annual CH4
emissions in mt CH4 would be reported
for each well whether emissions were
calculated using Calculation Method 1
or Calculation Method 2.
To clearly define the emission source
type and parameters to use in the
emissions calculations, the EPA is
proposing to define three new terms in
40 CFR 98.238. The EPA is proposing to
define ‘‘drilling mud’’ as a mixture of
clays and additives with water, oil, or
synthetic materials continuously
pumped through the drill string and out
the bit while drilling to cool and
lubricate the drill bit and to move
cuttings through the wellbore to the
surface. The EPA is proposing to define
‘‘drilling mud degassing’’ as the practice
of safely removing pockets of free gas
entrained in the drilling mud once it is
outside of the wellbore. ‘‘Mud rate’’ is
proposed to mean the pumping rate of
the mud by the mud pumps, usually
measured in gpm. The mud rate would
be an input to proposed equation W–41.
Finally, we note that in proposing
these new requirements, we considered
adding mud degassing emissions to two
existing source categories in the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production industry segment, well
completions and workovers with
hydraulic fracturing and well
completions and workover without
hydraulic fracturing, rather than
proposing calculation and reporting
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50308
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
requirements for mud degassing as a
new emissions source. Upstream oil and
gas development is undertaken in two
stages, exploration and production. The
exploration stage consists of well
drilling followed by well completion,
including casing of the well and
hydraulically fracturing the well (in the
case of hydraulically fractured
completion). However, for purposes of
this proposal, the EPA has determined
that well drilling activities are a distinct
activity separate from well completion.
For example, a common practice in the
oil and gas industry is to drill a well but
leave the borehole uncompleted
(referred to in the oil and gas industry
as ‘‘drilled but uncompleted’’). These
boreholes are left uncompleted for a
period of time until economic
conditions improve, completion crews
are available, or for other reasons. Even
without completion, the drilling activity
still has the potential to produce
emissions. Therefore, the EPA is
proposing drilling mud degassing as a
new emissions source type source for
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facilities.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
5. Crankcase Venting
The EPA is proposing to add
calculation and reporting requirements
for CH4 emissions from a new emission
source type, crankcase ventilation from
RICE or GT used in the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production,
Onshore Natural Gas Processing,
Onshore Natural Gas Transmission
Compression, Underground Natural Gas
Storage, LNG Storage, LNG Import and
Export Equipment, Natural Gas
Distribution, and Onshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segments. Crankcase
ventilation is the process of venting or
removing blow-by from the void spaces
of an internal combustion engine
outside of the combustion cylinders to
prevent excessive pressure build-up
within the engine.57 This proposed
source does not include ingestive
systems that vent blow-by into the
engine where it is returned to the
combustion process.58
The EPA first proposed including
‘‘crankcase vents’’ in subpart W in the
January 2016 proposal to add leaker
57 Cox, J. ‘‘Managing Engine Blow-by with
Crankcase Ventilation Systems.’’ The Solberg Blog,
June 17, 2022. Available at https://
www.solbergmfg.com/en/resources/blog/crankcaseventilation-system-for-engine-in-the-pow and in the
docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
58 See, e.g., Caterpillar. Application & Installation
Guide: Crankcase Ventilation Systems. LEBW4958–
04. 2015. Available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–
0234.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
emission factors (81 FR 4987, January
29, 2016). At that time in 2016, the EPA
proposed to add new monitoring
methods for detecting leaks from oil and
gas equipment in the petroleum and
natural gas systems source category
consistent with the leak detection
methods in the then proposed NSPS
OOOOa (80 FR 56593, September 18,
2015). Specifically, in 2016, the EPA
proposed aligning subpart W equipment
components with the 2015 proposed
NSPS OOOOa definition of ‘‘fugitive
emissions component,’’ which was ‘‘any
component that has the potential to emit
fugitive emissions of [CH4] or VOC at a
well site or compressor station site,
including but not limited to valves,
connectors, pressure relief devices,
open-ended lines, access doors, flanges,
closed vent systems, thief hatches or
other openings on storage vessels,
agitator seals, distance pieces, crankcase
vents, blowdown vents, pump seals or
diaphragms, compressors, separators,
pressure vessels, dehydrators, heaters,
instruments, and meters’’ (80 FR 56593,
September 18, 2015). The proposed
NSPS OOOOa definition of ‘‘fugitive
emissions component’’ also indicated
that it did not include devices that
‘‘vent as part of normal operations.’’
Commenters on the proposed NSPS
OOOOa indicated that some of the
examples listed within the proposed
definition of ‘‘fugitive emissions
component’’ did include devices that
vent as part of normal operations,
including crankcase vents.59 As a result
of these comments, the final definition
for ‘‘fugitive emissions component’’ in
the NSPS OOOOa (81 FR 35824, June 3,
2016) did not include the reference to
‘‘crankcase vents’’ or other types of
devices that vent as part of normal
operations, consistent with the EPA’s
stated intent in the 2015 NSPS OOOOa
proposal not to include those devices in
the definition. The 2016 promulgated
amendments to subpart W for fugitive
emissions aligned with the definition of
‘‘fugitive emissions component’’ in the
final NSPS OOOOa.
We have estimated sector-wide
emissions from crankcase ventilation
using data from a 2015 study published
by Johnson et al., Methane Emissions
from Leak and Loss Audits of Natural
Gas Compressor Stations and Storage
Facilities.60 In this study, the audit of
59 U.S. EPA. EPA’s Responses to Public
Comments on the EPA’s Oil and Natural Gas Sector:
Emission Standards for New, Reconstructed, and
Modified Sources. Chapter 4—Fugitives Monitoring.
May 2016. Available as EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0505–
7632 and in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
60 Johnson, D.R., et al. 2015. ‘‘Methane Emissions
from Leak and Loss Audits of Natural Gas
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
three natural gas compressor stations
and two natural gas storage facilities
yielded an average ratio of crankcase-toexhaust emissions of 14.4 percent. The
study authors compared total emissions
rate (crankcase plus exhaust) against
literature values of a four-cylinder lean
burning engine in EPA’s Compilation of
Air Pollutant Emission Factors (AP–
42).61 The literature value overpredicted
the combined emissions by 11.4
percent, which slightly exceeded the
calculated uncertainty for exhaust
emissions of 7.2 percent. This
comparison indicates the measured
value offers a reasonable estimate of CH4
loss from natural gas compressor
stations and storage facilities. Based on
this study, the EPA conservatively
estimates that the total CH4 emissions
from crankcase ventilation that could be
reported to the GHGRP would be
approximately 800,000 mt per year,
assuming crankcase emissions are 14.4
percent of combustion emissions from
all proposed industry segments. For
more information on the estimation of
potential CH4 emissions from crankcase
venting, see the subpart W TSD,
available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2023–0234.
The API provided an emission factor
for CH4 from crankcase ventilation in
their 2021 API Compendium.62 API’s
emission factor was developed from
results from Phase II of a comprehensive
measurement program conducted to
determine cost-effective directed
inspection and maintenance control
opportunities for reducing natural gas
losses due to fugitive equipment leaks
and avoidable process inefficiencies.
Phase II of the program was conducted
at five gas processing plants, seven
gathering compressor stations, and
twelve well sites during 2004 and
2005.63
Compressor Stations and Storage Facilities.’’
Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 13, 8132–8138. July
4, 2015. Available at https://doi.org/10.1021/
es506163m and in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
61 U.S. EPA. AP–42 Compilation of Air Pollutant
Emission Factors, 5th ed. Volume I, Chapter 3:
Stationary Internal Combustion Sources: Section 3.1
Stationary Gas Turbines and Section 3.2 Natural
Gas-fired Reciprocating Engines. Available at
https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-factors-andquantification/ap-42-fifth-edition-volume-i-chapter3-stationary-0 and in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
62 Compendium of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Methodologies For The Natural Gas And Oil
Industry. Produced by URS Corporation for
American Petroleum Institute. November 2021.
Available at https://www.api.org/-/media/files/
policy/esg/ghg/2021-api-ghg-compendium110921.pdf and in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
63 Cost-Effective Directed Inspection and
Maintenance Control Opportunities at Five Gas
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
Based on the information provided in
this section, the EPA is proposing to add
40 CFR 98.233(ee) to provide a
component-level average emission
factor approach for estimating emissions
for crankcase ventilation based on the
number of crankcase vents on RICE or
GT in the facility. The proposed CH4
emission factor for crankcase ventilation
is 2.28 standard cubic feet per hour per
source, as provided in the 2021 API
Compendium. The 2021 API
Compendium emission factor was
selected as representative because it was
developed from results of the most
comprehensive field study of crankcase
ventilation in the oil and natural sector
available to date. Site-specific
information required for the emission
calculation would include the number
of crankcase vents on RICE or GT, the
operating time of each engine or GT,
and the concentration of CH4 in the gas
stream entering the engines or GT. If
site-specific CH4 concentration is
unknown, the proposed provision
includes an option to determine the CH4
concentration in the gas stream using
either engineering estimates based on
best available data or the provisions of
40 CFR 98.233(u)(2). The EPA is seeking
comment on whether this calculation
method is appropriate and whether
there are other methodologies that we
should consider providing, including
details on how those additional
methods would be applied to this
source. For reporting, the EPA is
proposing to add 40 CFR 98.236(ee) to
require reporters to provide emissions,
the number of crankcase vents at the
facility, and engine or GT operating
hours.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
D. Reporting for the Onshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Production and
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting Industry
Segments
Within the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production and Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting industry segments, GHG
emissions and activity data are currently
generally reported at the basin, county/
sub-basin, or unit level, depending upon
the specific emission source. Examples
of emission sources that report at the
sub-basin or county level include
Processing Plants and Upstream Gathering
Compressor Stations and Well Sites. EPA Phase II
Aggregate Site Report prepared for U.S. EPA
Natural Gas STAR Program by Natural Gas
Machinery Laboratory, Clearstone Engineering Ltd.,
and Innovative Environmental Solutions, Inc.
March 2006. Available at https://www.epa.gov/
sites/default/files/2016-08/documents/clearstone_
ii_03_2006.pdf and in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–
0234.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
liquids unloading, completions and
workovers with hydraulic fracturing,
and storage tanks. Sources that report at
the facility (basin) level include natural
gas pneumatic devices, blowdown vent
stacks, and equipment leaks. The
current aggregation of data reported
within the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production and Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting segments can present
challenges in the process of emissions
verification, with corresponding
potential impacts on data quality, and it
also limits data transparency.
In order to address these concerns and
improve data quality consistent with
section II.C of this preamble, the EPA is
proposing to disaggregate reporting
requirements within the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production
and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting industry
segments. As a first step, the EPA is
proposing to revise the reporting
requirements to be more explicitly
consistent with the current reporting
form structure for the well identification
(ID) numbers at the facility, with two
proposed changes and one addition.
Currently, for certain emission sources
directly related to wells (liquids
unloading, completions and workovers
with hydraulic fracturing, completions
and workovers without hydraulic
fracturing well testing, and associated
natural gas), subpart W requires
reporters to provide a list of well ID
numbers in each sub-basin that
contributed to the emissions (e.g., a list
of well IDs that had completions or
workovers with hydraulic fracturing).
Under existing 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(1)(ii)(D) through (H),
reporters are also asked to provide the
counts of wells that were producing,
acquired, divested, completed, and/or
permanently taken out of production for
each sub-basin, along with a list of well
ID number for the wells in each of those
categories. For the subpart W reporting
form, these requirements were
implemented through addition of a
single table, in which reporters provide
a list of all well ID numbers, the subbasin, the operating status per 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(1)(ii)(D) through (H), and any
well-specific information required for
the emission source types directly
related to wells. The EPA is proposing
to revise 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(1)(ii) and
add requirements to 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(1)(iii) that reflect this
reporting form structure, with two
notable changes. First, the EPA is
proposing to no longer require reporting
of the sub-basin ID for each well.
Instead, reporters would report the sub-
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50309
basin ID by well-pad and then report the
well-pad ID on which the well is
located. The well-pad ID is a new
proposed data element and is described
in the following paragraph. Second, the
EPA is proposing to revise the
requirements to provide a list of well
IDs for the five emission source types
directly related to wells (currently
required in 40 CFR 98.236(f)(1)(ii),
(f)(2)(i), (g)(1), (h)(1)(i), (h)(2)(i), (h)(3)(i),
(h)(4)(i), (l)(1)(ii), (l)(2)(ii), (l)(3)(ii),
(l)(4)(ii), (m)(1), (m)(7)(i), and (m)(8)(i))
to instead specify that reporters should
report emissions and activity data for
each of those emission source types by
well within the source-specific
reporting requirements, as described
later in this section.
Second, the EPA is proposing to add
the following data elements: well-pad ID
(for Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production segment) and gathering and
boosting site ID (for Onshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Gathering and
Boosting). These proposed data
elements are hereafter collectively
referred to as ‘‘site-level IDs.’’ The EPA
is proposing to add to 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(1)(iv) (for Onshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Production) and 40
CFR 98.236(aa)(10)(v) (for Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting) requirements for
reporting of information related to each
well-pad ID and gathering and boosting
site ID, respectively. The proposed
reporting elements for each well-pad ID
include a unique name or ID for each
well-pad, the sub-basin ID, and the
location (i.e., representative latitude and
longitude coordinates).
For the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segments, the EPA is proposing
at 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(10)(v) to require
reporters to provide a unique name or
ID, the site type, and the location for
each gathering and boosting site. For the
‘‘site type’’ for each gathering and
boosting site, the EPA is proposing that
reporters would select between
‘‘gathering compressor station,’’
‘‘centralized oil production site,’’
‘‘gathering pipeline site,’’ or ‘‘other
fence-line site.’’ The EPA is proposing a
definition of ‘‘gathering compressor
station’’ in 40 CFR 98.238 to be used for
the purposes of this reporting
requirement and to differentiate
gathering compressor stations from
other types of compressor stations in
subpart W (e.g., transmission
compressor stations). The Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting industry segment also
includes centralized oil production sites
that collect oil from multiple well-pads
but that do not have compressors (i.e.,
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50310
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
are not ‘‘compressor stations’’). The EPA
is also proposing to add a definition of
a ‘‘centralized oil production site’’ in 40
CFR 98.238 to be used for the purposes
of this reporting requirement. For
gathering pipelines, the EPA is
proposing a definition of ‘‘gathering
pipeline site’’ to specify that it is all the
gathering pipelines at the facility within
a single state. In addition, the EPA has
received information from stakeholders
noting that there are facility
configurations that would not clearly fit
within the proposed definition for
‘‘gathering compressor station’’ or
‘‘centralized oil production site,’’
including, but not limited to, booster
stations, dehydration facilities, and
treating facilities.64 The EPA is
proposing to provide the ‘‘other fenceline site’’ site type to cover these types
of sites. For gathering pipelines, the
EPA is proposing within the definition
of ‘‘gathering and boosting site’’ that a
gathering pipeline site is all the
gathering pipelines at the facility within
a single state. For the ‘‘location’’
reported for each gathering and boosting
site, the EPA is proposing that reporters
would provide the representative
latitude and longitude coordinates
where the site type is a gathering
compressor station, centralized oil
production site or other fence-line
facility, and the state where the site type
is a gathering pipeline.
For the emission source types in the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production industry segment directly
related to wells that currently report by
sub-basin (i.e., well venting for liquids
unloading, completions and workovers
with hydraulic fracturing, completions
and workovers without hydraulic
fracturing, and associated gas venting or
flaring) or by calculation method and
use of a flare (i.e., well testing), we are
proposing to require reporting of
emissions and activity data for each
individual well instead of in the current
aggregations (e.g., by sub-basin). Where
the current emission source-level
provisions of 40 CFR 98.236 for the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production industry segment and the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting industry
segment require reporting at either the
facility or the sub-basin level (other than
the emission source types directly
related to wells), we are proposing to no
64 Letter from Angie Burckhalter, The Petroleum
Alliance of Oklahoma, to Administrator Michael S.
Regan, U.S. EPA, Re: Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2019–0424; Revisions and Confidentiality
Determinations for Data Elements Under the
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule. October 6, 2022.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
longer require reporting at the sub-basin
level and instead require reporters to
provide emissions and activity data by
well-pad ID or gathering and boosting
site ID for each facility. For emission
source types that report at the unit level
(e.g., AGRs, dehydrators, and flares), we
are proposing to maintain reporting at
that level but are proposing to also
require the reporter to identify the wellpad ID or gathering and boosting site ID.
This proposed requirement would take
the place of the reporting of the county
or sub-basin ID, if applicable. The EPA
is seeking comment as to whether the
lower levels of aggregation of activity
data to the site level within the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production
and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting segments would
cause data elements that are currently
not entitled to confidential treatment
(i.e., data elements that are not
considered ‘‘emissions data’’ as
described in section V of this preamble)
to become entitled to confidential
treatment. See section V of this
preamble for further information about
the proposed confidentiality
determinations and reporting
determinations for inputs to emissions
equations.
In addition, the EPA is proposing
revisions to the language of existing
reporting requirements and proposing to
require specific throughput data
elements related to wells permanently
shut-in and plugged during the
reporting year. First, the EPA is
proposing to revise the phrase
‘‘permanently taken out of production
(i.e., plugged and abandoned)’’ in
proposed 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(1)(ii)(D)
and (H) to read ‘‘permanently shut-in
and plugged’’ for consistency with the
language used in CAA section 136. This
proposed amendment is for consistency
in language rather than any expected
difference in the wells to be reported or
the interpretation of the terms. Second,
the EPA is proposing to require
reporting of the quantities of natural gas,
crude oil and condensate produced that
is sent to sale during the reporting year
for each well that is permanently shutin and plugged in 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(1)(iii)(C) through (E) for the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production industry segment and 40
CFR 98.236(aa)(2)(iv) through (vi) for
the Offshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production industry segment. Third, for
each Onshore Petroleum and Natural
Gas Production well-pad with a well
that was permanently shut-in and
plugged the EPA is proposing to require
reporting of the total quantities of
natural gas, crude oil and condensate
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
produced that is sent to sale in the
reporting year for the wells on that wellpad. These proposed data elements, if
finalized, are anticipated to be useful in
the future evaluation of the plugged
well provisions of CAA section
136(f)(7).
E. Natural Gas Pneumatic Device
Venting and Natural Gas Driven
Pneumatic Pump Venting
Subpart W currently requires
calculation of GHG emissions from
natural gas pneumatic device venting
(existing 40 CFR 98.233(a)) and natural
gas driven pneumatic pump venting
(existing 40 CFR 98.233(c)) using default
population emission factors multiplied
by the number of devices and the
average time those devices are ‘‘inservice’’ (i.e., supplied with natural gas).
In our 2022 Proposed Rule, we proposed
to update the population emission
factors for pneumatic devices based on
recent study data. Consistent with
section II.B of this preamble, we are
proposing calculation methods based on
measurements and leak screening for
each source type as described in this
section. Under the proposed calculation
methods for pneumatic devices, the
existing default population emission
factors for intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices would no longer be
applicable and the default population
emission factors for continuous bleed
natural gas pneumatic devices would
only be applicable for the leak screening
method (proposed Calculation Method
3).
1. Direct Measurement Methods for
Natural Gas Pneumatic Devices and
Natural Gas Pneumatic Pumps
Consistent with section II.B of this
preamble, we are proposing to provide
a calculation method based on direct
measurement of natural gas supplied to
pneumatic devices in proposed 40 CFR
98.233(a)(1) and supplied to pneumatic
pumps in proposed 40 CFR 98.233(c)(1).
We are proposing that, if a flow
monitoring device is installed on the
natural gas supply line dedicated to one
or a combination of pneumatic devices,
or the natural gas supply line dedicated
to one or more pneumatic pumps, that
are vented directly to the atmosphere,
then the measured flow must be used to
calculate the emissions from the
pneumatic devices or pneumatic
pumps, as applicable, downstream of
that flow monitor. We are also
proposing to require this calculation
method when the flow is continuously
measured in a supply line that serves
both pneumatic devices and natural gas
driven pneumatic pumps that are all
vented directly to the atmosphere. The
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
flow monitor would be required to meet
the requirements specified in existing
40 CFR 98.234(b). We are proposing to
denote this natural gas supply
measurement as Calculation Method 1
for pneumatic devices and pneumatic
pumps. We are also proposing to add
reporting requirements for each
measurement location to report the type
of flow monitor, the number of each
type of pneumatic device being
monitored at that location, and an
indication of whether any natural gas
driven pneumatic pumps are also
monitored at that location, and the CH4
and CO2 emissions calculated for that
monitoring location in proposed 40 CFR
98.236(b)(3). Comparable reporting
requirements for natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps are specified in
proposed 40 CFR 98.236(c)(3).
For natural gas pneumatic devices
that do not have or do not elect to install
a flow meter dedicated to measuring the
flow of natural gas supplied to one or
a combination of pneumatic devices that
are vented directly to the atmosphere,
we are proposing in 40 CFR 98.233(a)(2)
to allow reporters to measure the natural
gas emissions from each pneumatic
device vented directly to the
atmosphere at the well-pad, gathering
and boosting site, or facility, as
applicable, using one of the
measurement methods in existing 40
CFR 98.234(b) through (d). We are
proposing to refer to the vent
measurement method as Calculation
Method 2 for pneumatic devices. For
natural gas driven pneumatic pumps
that do not have or do not elect to install
a flow meter dedicated to measuring the
flow of natural gas supplied to one or
a combination of pneumatic pumps
vented directly to the atmosphere, we
are proposing to require that the
reporter either measure the natural gas
emissions from each such pneumatic
pump at the facility as specified in
proposed 40 CFR 98.233(c)(2) or
calculate emissions from each such
pneumatic pump at the facility using
the default emissions factor as specified
in proposed 40 CFR 98.233(c)(3). The
proposed measurement option is
referred to as Calculation Method 2 for
pumps and is similar to the proposed
Calculation Method 2 for pneumatic
devices. The proposed pneumatic pump
method based on a default emission
factor is the same as the methodology in
40 CFR 98.233(c) of the existing rule
and is referred to as Calculation Method
3 in the proposed rule.
If Calculation Method 2 is elected for
pneumatic devices, we are proposing
that all pneumatic devices that are
vented directly to the atmosphere
present at the facility (except those for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
which natural gas supply is measured
according to Calculation Method 1)
would have to be measured at regular
intervals and that for a well-pad,
gathering and boosting site, or facility,
as applicable, selected to be measured
that year, all pneumatic devices that
vent to the atmosphere must be
measured according to Calculation
Method 2 (except those for which
natural gas supply is measured
according to Calculation Method 1). For
facilities in the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production and in the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting industry
segments, a complete cycle of
measurements would be required to be
completed in no more than 5 years, and
we are proposing that the number of
pneumatic devices measured each year
be approximately equal. We selected a
5-year interval for Onshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Production and
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting facilities
because of the high number of devices
at these facilities and the time needed to
measure all natural gas pneumatic
devices. Additionally, we are proposing
that when measurements are conducted
at a particular well-pad or gathering and
boosting site, all pneumatic devices at
that well-pad or gathering and boosting
site must be measured in the same year.
This would help enhance the
representativeness of the measurement
data.
For facilities in the Onshore Natural
Gas Processing, Onshore Natural Gas
Transmission Compression,
Underground Natural Gas Storage, and
Natural Gas Distribution industry
segments, we are proposing the
measurement interval to be dependent
on the number of devices at the facility.
For facilities with 25 or fewer natural
gas pneumatic devices, we are
proposing measurement of all devices
annually. For facilities with 26 to 50
devices, we are proposing measurement
of all devices in a two-year period. The
proposed interval period increases with
every 25 devices, until reaching a
maximum cycle time of 5 years for
facilities with 101 or more natural gas
pneumatic devices that are vented
directly to the atmosphere. The 25device increment was selected because
we estimated that this would be the
typical number of devices that could be
measured following the proposed
methods in an 8-hour period.
Under Calculation Method 2, we are
proposing that each pneumatic device
vent measurement, except for isolation
valve actuators, would be conducted for
a minimum of 15 minutes;
measurements for pneumatic isolation
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50311
valve actuators would be conducted for
a minimum of 5 minutes. We are
proposing a reduced monitoring
duration for isolation valve actuators
specifically because these devices
actuate very infrequently, and the
monitoring is targeted to confirm the
valve actuators are not malfunctioning
(i.e., emitting when not actuating) rather
than to develop an average emission rate
considering some limited number of
actuations. We are proposing that, if
there is a measurable flow during the
measurement period, the average flow
rate measured during the measurement
period would be used as the average
flow rate for that device and multiplied
by the total hours the device is in
service (i.e., supplied with natural gas)
to calculate annual emissions (by
pneumatic device type). For continuous
bleed devices, if there is no measurable
flow rate (i.e., flow rate is below the
method detection limit), we are
proposing to require reporters to
confirm the device is in service when
measured and that the device type is
correctly characterized. Once
confirmed, we are proposing that the
device must be retested (if designated as
a high bleed device) or the
manufacturer’s steady state bleed rate
must be used (if designated as a low
bleed device) to estimate the device’s
emissions. For intermittent bleed
devices, the lack of any emissions
during a 5-minute or 15-minute period,
as applicable, would indicate that the
device did not actuate and that the
device is seating correctly when not
actuating. As such, we are proposing
that engineering calculations would be
made to estimate emissions per
activation and that company records or
engineering estimates would be used to
assess the number of actuations per year
to calculate the emissions from that
device for the reporting year.
Under Calculation Method 2, if vent
measurements are made over several
years, we are proposing that all
measurements made within a multi-year
measurement would be used to
calculate a facility-specific emission
factor by device type (continuous high
bleed, continuous low bleed, and
intermittent bleed). The emissions
measurements for the pneumatic device
vents measured during the reporting
year would be used directly for those
devices. We are proposing that reporters
would use the facility-specific emission
factor developed from the cycle of
measurements times the number of
devices (by type) at the facility that were
not measured during the reporting year
to calculate the emissions from the
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50312
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
pneumatic devices that were not
measured during the reporting year.
Reporters using proposed Calculation
Method 2 would report for each wellpad, gathering and boosting site, or
facility, as applicable, the total number
of natural gas pneumatic devices by
type, the number of years in the
measurement cycle, the number of
devices by measured in the reporting
year, the value of the emissions factor
for the reporting year as calculated
using equation W–1A and the devices
upon which the emission factor is
based, the average time the devices were
in service (i.e., supplied with natural
gas) during the calendar year, and the
GHG emissions for each type of natural
gas pneumatic device.
We are proposing calculation and
reporting requirements for Calculation
Method 2 for pneumatic pumps in
proposed 40 CFR 98.233(c)(2) and
proposed 40 CFR 98.236(c)(4),
respectively, that are similar to the
proposed Calculation Method 2
requirements for pneumatic devices,
with differences described as follows.
First, only facilities in the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production
and in the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segments are currently
required to report emissions from
pneumatic pumps and based on the
analysis performed as described in
section III.C.1 of this preamble and
documented in the subpart W TSD, we
are not proposing to add this source
type for any other industry segment.
Therefore, proposed Calculation Method
2 for pneumatic pumps only includes
the provisions for a 5-year cycle and
does not include the measurement
cycles for other industry segments. The
5-year cycle is being proposed for
natural gas driven pneumatic pumps for
the same reason that it is being
proposed for pneumatic devices (i.e., a
few facilities have a high number of
pumps, and the time needed to measure
all of the pumps in a single year would
be excessive). To minimize the burden
while still collecting sufficient data to
calculate sufficiently accurate
emissions, we are proposing an
approach similar to the current
approach that Natural Gas Distribution
facilities may use to conduct equipment
leak surveys. Second, the proposal
specifies that reporters would measure
for a minimum of 5 minutes while
liquid is continuously being pumped.
Five minutes is currently specified for
other emission measurements in the
rule (e.g., leak rates from transmission
storage tank vents in existing 40 CFR
98.233(k)(2), which are condensate
storage tank vents in this proposal).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
Typically, emissions from pumps are
expected to be greater than leak rates
from transmission storage tank leaks.
Thus, it is expected that a sufficient
volume of sample would be collected in
5 minutes of pump operation to be
measurable with sufficient accuracy.
Third, we are proposing that the
emissions would be calculated as the
product of the measured natural gas
flow rate and the number of hours the
pneumatic pump was pumping. Under
proposed Calculation Method 2 for
pneumatic pumps, proposed reporting
data elements in 40 CFR 98.236(c)(4) per
well-pad or gathering and boosting site
would include the number of years in
the measurement cycle; an indication of
whether emissions were measured or
calculated; the primary measurement
method (when emissions were
measured); the value of the calculated
emissions factor, the total number of
pumps measured and used in
calculating the emission factor, the
number of pumps that vented to
atmosphere, and the estimated average
number of hours per year that the
vented pumps were pumping liquid
(when the emissions were calculated);
the total measured CO2 and CH4
emissions; and the total calculated CO2
and CH4 emissions.
We request comment on whether the
option of up to a 5-year cycle is
appropriate for all facilities in the
onshore production and gathering and
boosting industry segments. If a shorter
time frame would be appropriate, we
request comment on how long the
maximum cycle should be and why that
length of time would be adequate. We
also request comment on the proposed
sampling period of 5 minutes. If a longer
test period would be needed or a shorter
time period would be sufficient to
collect representative emissions data,
we request comment on what time
period would be appropriate and the
reasons why that test time would be
appropriate. Finally, we request
comment on suggestions for other
approaches to emissions measurement
that might be more effective and better
achieve the goal of obtaining accurate
vented emissions data from natural gas
driven pneumatic pumps.
2. Intermittent Bleed Pneumatic Device
Surveys
As part of our review to characterize
pneumatic device emissions, we found
a significant difference in the emissions
from intermittent bleed pneumatic
devices that appeared to be functioning
as intended (short, small releases during
device actuation) and those that
appeared to be malfunctioning
(continuously emitting or exhibiting
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
large or prolonged releases upon
actuation). For natural gas intermittent
bleed pneumatic devices, it is possible
to identify malfunctioning devices
through routine monitoring using OGI
or other technologies. As noted in the
introduction to section II of this
preamble, the EPA recently proposed
NSPS OOOOb and EG OOOOc for oil
and natural gas sources. Under the
proposed standards in NSPS OOOOb
and the proposed presumptive
standards in EG OOOOc (which would
inform the state plans or, if necessary,
the Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62),
nearly all covered pneumatic devices
(continuous bleed and intermittent vent)
would be required to have a CH4 (and,
for NSPS OOOOb only, VOC) emission
rate of zero. The only proposed
exception would be for pneumatic
devices in Alaska at locations where onsite power is not available, in which
case owners and operators would be
required to use low bleed pneumatic
devices in place of high bleed
pneumatic devices (unless a high bleed
device is needed for a functional need
such as safety), and to verify that any
intermittent bleed pneumatic devices
operate such that they do not vent when
idle by monitoring these devices during
the fugitive emissions survey.
We envision relatively few
intermittent bleed pneumatic devices
that vent GHG to the atmosphere under
the proposed zero-emission standard
and presumptive standard for these
pneumatic devices, compliance with
which would require the use of
technology to achieve the zero-emission
standard. As noted in the previous
paragraph, we proposed in NSPS
OOOOb and EG OOOOc to require
periodic monitoring of those few
intermittent bleed pneumatic devices in
Alaska. In addition, as noted in section
II of this preamble, the proposed
amendments that would apply to
sources subject to the NSPS OOOOb and
approved state plans or applicable
Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62 would
not become effective for individual
reporters unless and until their emission
sources become subject to and are
required to comply with either the final
NSPS OOOOb or an approved state plan
or applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR
part 62. Prior to that time, a reporter
may elect to conduct inspections or
surveys of their intermittent bleed
pneumatic devices. Therefore, the EPA
is proposing amendments to subpart W
to provide an alternative methodology
to calculate emissions from intermittent
bleed pneumatic devices based on the
results of inspections or surveys,
consistent with section II.B of this
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
preamble. Specifically, we are
proposing to provide in 40 CFR
98.233(a)(3) an alternative calculation
methodology for facilities that monitor
for malfunctioning intermittent bleed
pneumatic devices analogous to a
‘‘leaker factor’’ approach used for
equipment leaks. We included this
‘‘leaker factor’’ approach in the 2022
Proposed Rule; however, we are
proposing revisions to the ‘‘leaker
factors’’ terms included in the
calculation approach using peer
reviewed study data. We are proposing
to refer to this monitoring/leaker factor
approach as Calculation Method 3 for
pneumatic devices.
If Calculation Method 3 is elected, we
are proposing that all intermittent bleed
pneumatic devices that vent to the
atmosphere at the well-pad, gathering
and boosting site, or facility, as
applicable, would be required to be
monitored according to the leak
detection methods in 40 CFR
98.234(a)(1) through (3), but with a
monitoring duration of at least 2
minutes or until a malfunction is
identified. Based on our review of the
measurement studies that identified
malfunctioning intermittent bleed
devices, we found that most
malfunctioning devices could be
identified using a 2-minute monitoring
duration, but malfunctioning devices
could not be identified effectively using
a typical ‘‘leak survey’’ monitoring
duration, which is on the order of a few
seconds. However, if a pneumatic
device is observed to be malfunctioning
in the first minute, there is no need to
continue to monitor that device.
Therefore, we are proposing that a
minimum monitoring duration of 2
minutes or until a malfunction is
identified be used for the purpose of
identifying malfunctioning intermittent
bleed pneumatic controllers.
Under Calculation Method 3, we are
proposing that all intermittent bleed
pneumatic devices that are vented
directly to the atmosphere present at the
facility (except those for which natural
gas supply is measured according to
Calculation Method 1) would have to be
monitored to identify malfunctioning
devices at regular intervals, with a
complete cycle of measurements being
completed in no more than 5 years for
facilities in the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production and in the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting industry
segments. Additionally, we are
proposing that when monitoring is
conducted at a particular well-pad or
gathering and boosting site, all
pneumatic devices at that well-pad or
gathering and boosting site must be
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
monitored in the same year. This would
help enhance the representativeness of
the measurement data. For facilities in
the Onshore Natural Gas Processing,
Onshore Natural Gas Transmission
Compression, Underground Natural Gas
Storage, and Natural Gas Distribution
industry segments, we are proposing the
monitoring interval to be dependent on
the number of intermittent bleed
pneumatic devices at the facility. For
facilities with 100 or fewer natural gas
intermittent bleed pneumatic devices,
we are proposing monitoring of all
devices annually. For facilities with 101
to 200 devices, we are proposing
measurement of all devices in a 2-year
period. The proposed interval period
increases with every 100 devices, until
reaching a maximum cycle time of 5
years for facilities with 401 or more
natural gas pneumatic devices vented
directly to the atmosphere. The 100device increment was selected because
we estimated that this would be the
typical number of devices that could be
monitored following the proposed
methods in an 8-hour period. For all
industry segments, we are proposing
that, if you elect to monitor your
pneumatic devices over multiple years,
you must monitor approximately the
same number of devices each year.
Under Calculation Method 3, if a
‘‘leak’’ is observed from the intermittent
bleed pneumatic device for more than 5
seconds during a device actuation, then
the device is considered to be
‘‘malfunctioning’’ and the
malfunctioning device emission factor
(similar to a leaker emission factor)
would be applied to that device.
Emissions from intermittent bleed
pneumatic devices that were not
observed to be malfunctioning would be
calculated based on the default emission
factor for ‘‘properly functioning’’
intermittent bleed pneumatic devices.
We are proposing in the definition of
the variable ‘‘Tz’’ in proposed equation
W–1C that the time that a device is
assumed to be malfunctioning would be
determined following the same
procedures as the determination of the
duration of equipment leaks identified
during a leak survey conducted under
40 CFR 98.233(q) (see the variable ‘‘Tp,z’’
in equation W–30 for equipment leaks).
For example, if only one survey of
intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices is conducted during
the reporting year, then any device
found to be malfunctioning during the
survey would be required to be assumed
to be malfunctioning for the entire year.
If a complete survey of intermittent
bleed pneumatic devices is completed
over multiple years, we are proposing
equation W–1D be used to calculate the
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50313
emissions. As proposed, this equation
uses the ratio of the number of
intermittent bleed devices identified to
be malfunctioning during the current
reporting year to the total number of
intermittent bleed devices monitored
during the reporting year to estimate the
number of malfunctioning and properly
functioning intermittent bleed devices
for the intermittent bleed devices that
were not monitored during the reporting
year.
Under Calculation Method 3, we are
proposing that emissions from
continuous bleed pneumatic controllers
(other than those for which the natural
gas supply flow is measured as specified
in Calculation Method 1) would be
determined either by annually
measuring the emissions from the
pneumatic device vent following the
methods provided in Calculation
Method 2 or by using applicable default
population emission factors for
continuous high bleed and continuous
low bleed pneumatic devices.
Reporters using proposed Calculation
Method 3 would report for each the
well-pad, gathering and boosting site, or
facility, as applicable, the total number
of natural gas pneumatic devices by
type, the method used to estimate
emissions from continuous bleed
natural gas pneumatic devices, the
frequency of monitoring for intermittent
devices, the number of years in a
monitoring cycle, the number of devices
at the facility, the number monitored in
the reporting year, the number found to
be malfunctioning, the average time the
malfunctioning devices were assumed
to be malfunctioning under proposed 40
CFR 98.236(b)(5), the average time that
devices that were monitored but were
not detected as malfunctioning year
were in service (i.e., supplied with
natural gas) during the calendar year,
and the GHG emissions for each type of
natural gas pneumatic device.
For more information regarding this
proposed alternative calculation
methodology for natural gas intermittent
bleed pneumatic devices, see the
subpart W TSD, available in the docket
for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
3. Revisions to Emission Factors
As noted in section III.E of this
preamble, subpart W currently requires
calculation of GHG emissions from
natural gas pneumatic device venting
using default population emission
factors multiplied by the number of
devices and the average time those
devices are ‘‘in-service’’ (i.e., supplied
with natural gas). Correspondingly, the
current default population factors for
natural gas pneumatic devices were
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50314
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
developed by taking both periods of
actuation and periods without actuation
into account. Subpart W provides two
sets of pneumatic device emission
factors, one for devices in the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production
and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting industry
segments and one for the Onshore
Natural Gas Transmission Compression
and Underground Natural Gas Storage
industry segments. Each set of emission
factors consists of emission factors for
three different types of natural gas
pneumatic devices: continuous low
bleed devices, continuous high bleed
devices, and intermittent bleed
devices.65
The EPA has become aware of several
studies on emissions from natural gas
pneumatic device vents since subpart W
was first promulgated. For example, in
April 2015, the EPA reviewed three
recently published studies on emissions
from pneumatic devices (also referred to
as ‘‘pneumatic controllers’’ within the
studies as well as in NSPS OOOOa,
proposed NSPS OOOOb, and proposed
EG OOOOc) at onshore production
facilities and evaluated those studies for
use in the U.S. GHG Inventory.66 As part
of this proposed rulemaking, we have
reviewed these and other available
studies to evaluate the potential for
revisions to the natural gas pneumatic
device emission factors in subpart W.
As part of our review, we found there
are significantly more data available
now by which to characterize
pneumatic device emissions. Therefore,
consistent with section II.B of this
preamble, we are proposing to amend
the emission factors for all industry
segments for which emissions from
natural gas pneumatic device vents
must be calculated.
Under Calculation Method 3 for
pneumatic devices, default population
emission factors can be used for
continuous bleed devices. Therefore, for
continuous low bleed pneumatic
devices, we are proposing an emission
factor of 6.8 standard cubic feet per hour
per device (scf/hr/device) based on the
available measurement data, which
65 The development of the current emission
factors for natural gas pneumatic devices is
described in Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting
from the Petroleum And Natural Gas Industry:
Background Technical Support Document, U.S.
EPA, November 2010, (Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2009–0923–3610), also available in the docket
for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
2023–0234.
66 U.S. EPA. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas
Emissions and Sinks: Potential Revisions to
Pneumatic Controller Emissions Estimate
(Production Segment). April 2015. Available at
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/201512/documents/ng-petro-inv-improvementpneumatic-controllers-4-10-2015.pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
considers devices that may be
malfunctioning (i.e., having higher
steady state bleed rates than specified
by the manufacturer) for all applicable
industry segments in proposed Table
W–1. For continuous high bleed
pneumatic devices, we are proposing
different population emission factors
depending on the applicable industry
segment. For facilities in the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production
and in the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segments, we are proposing an
emission factor of 21 scf/hr/device for
continuous high bleed devices in
existing Table W–1A (proposed Table
W–1) based on study data for these
industry segments. For facilities in the
Onshore Natural Gas Processing,
Onshore Natural Gas Transmission
Compression, Underground Natural Gas
Storage, and Natural Gas Distribution
industry segments, we are proposing an
emission factor of 30 scf/hr/device for
continuous high bleed devices in
proposed Table W–1 based on study
data from transmission compression
stations. These proposed continuous
bleed emission factors consider
emissions from pneumatic devices
based on measurements while the
devices are in service, not just actuating.
Because none of the three proposed
calculation methods described in
section III.E.1 and 2 of this preamble
would allow the use of the current
default population emission factor
methodology for intermittent bleed
pneumatic devices, we are proposing to
remove the population emission factors
for intermittent bleed pneumatic
devices from existing Tables W–1A, W–
3B, and W–4B and not include them in
proposed Table W–1. The EPA requests
comment on whether the EPA should
instead retain the use of default
population emission factors as an
alternative calculation methodology (as
Calculation Method 4) for sites, i.e.
include in the final rule an option for
sites to not conduct measurements or
monitor intermittent bleed devices. If
the population emission factor
calculation method is retained, the EPA
requests comment on the appropriate
intermittent bleed pneumatic device
emission factors to include in the final
rule. Based on our review of the recently
published pneumatic device study data,
we would consider revising the
intermittent bleed pneumatic device
emission factor for facilities in the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production and in the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting industry segments to 8.8
scf/hr/device. This emission factor
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
considers emissions from pneumatic
devices based on measurements while
the devices are in service, not just
actuating, and may include emissions
from devices that were malfunctioning
during the time of the measurement. We
have limited new data specific to
intermittent bleed pneumatic devices
for other industry segments. We would
consider retaining the intermittent bleed
pneumatic device emission factor of 2.3
scf/hr/device for facilities in other
applicable industry segments; however,
this emission factor is based on
engineering calculations and would
likely underestimate emissions from
devices that are malfunctioning (e.g.,
bleeding continuously or bleeding more
than expected during an actuation). The
EPA requests comment and supporting
data regarding potential revisions to the
intermittent bleed pneumatic device
population emission factors, if the use
of population emission factors as a
calculation methodology is retained.
For more information regarding this
review and development of the
proposed emission factors, see the
subpart W TSD, available in the docket
for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
Finally, we note that we are not
proposing to revise or remove the
default population emission factor in
existing Table W–1A (proposed Table
W–1) for natural gas driven pneumatic
pumps. Reporters that do not have or
elect to install a flow meter on the
natural gas supply line dedicated to any
one or more natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps and that do not elect
to measure the volumetric flow rate of
emissions from all the natural gas
driven pneumatic pumps vented
directly to the atmosphere at a well-pad
or gathering and boosting site would be
required to continue using the current
default population emission factor for
pneumatic pumps vented directly to the
atmosphere, as proposed Calculation
Method 3. The existing emission factor
is based on the average stroke volumes
and frequencies for a range of typical
pumps.67 In contrast to some other
equipment for which emission factors
are currently used to calculate
emissions (e.g., intermittent bleed
pneumatic devices), the emissions per
unit of operating time for a given pump
are not expected to vary significantly
due to malfunctions as the pump ages.
As such, we expect the natural gas
67 Methane Emissions from the Natural Gas
Industry, Volume 13: Chemical Injection Pumps,
Final Report. GRI–94/0257.30 and EPA–600/R–96–
080m. Gas Research Institute and U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. June 1996.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
driven pneumatic pump emission factor
to provide an acceptably accurate
estimate of the average hourly emissions
from natural gas driven pneumatic
pumps. For this reason, we are
proposing to retain the emission factor
calculation method for this source type.
In the 2022 Proposed Rule we
proposed clarifying the definition of the
time parameter in equation W–2 of the
current rule. The current definition is
the ‘‘average estimated number of hours
in the operating year that the pumps
were operational.’’ We proposed
changing the word ‘‘operational’’ to ‘‘in
service (i.e., supplied with natural gas).’’
This change was proposed to be
consistent with the proposed change to
the time term in equation W–1 for
pneumatic devices. This change was
proposed for the pneumatic device
equation because the specified emission
factors were developed based on
emission measurement tests conducted
over periods when the devices were
actuating as well as periods when they
were not actuating (i.e., theoretical
steady-state continuous bleeding, or for
intermittent devices, when they
theoretically were not emitting).
However, after further review, we
determined that the current emission
factor for pneumatic pumps was
developed based on observations of
pump operation at several production
facilities (e.g., stroke rates and
frequency of pump use) and pump
manufacturer data (e.g., gas
consumption per volume of chemical
pumped, plunger diameter, and stroke
length) for a variety of chemical
injection pumps.68 This means the
emission factor represents emissions
when pumps are actuating, or, in other
words, when they are actively pumping
liquid. Thus, we are now proposing to
clarify the definition of the term ‘‘T’’ in
current equation W–2 (equation W–2B
in proposed 40 CFR 98.233(c)) by
replacing the word ‘‘operational’’ with
‘‘pumping liquid.’’ We request comment
on the potential for natural gas to leak
through a pump to the atmosphere
when the pump is not actively pumping
liquid and the mechanism for such
leakage.
4. Hours of Operation of Natural Gas
Pneumatic Devices
In correspondence with the EPA via
e-GGRT, some reporters have indicated
that they are interpreting the term
68 Methane Emissions from the Natural Gas
Industry, Volume 13: Chemical Injection Pumps,
Final Report. GRI–94/0257.30 and EPA–600/R–96–
080m. Gas Research Institute and U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. June 1996.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
‘‘operational’’ in the definition of
variable ‘‘Tt’’ in equation W–1 in 40 CFR
98.233(a) and the term ‘‘operating’’ in
the reporting requirements in 40 CFR
98.236(b)(2) differently than the EPA
intended. Both the current emission
factors and the proposed calculation
methodologies described in sections
III.E.1 through III.E.3 of this preamble
for natural gas pneumatic devices were
developed by taking both periods of
actuation and periods without actuation
into account; 69 in other words, the
emission factors are population
emission factors considering all times
when the device was connected to
natural gas supply line. To calculate
emissions accurately using the existing
population emission factor, the average
number of hours used in equation W–
1 should be the number of hours that
the devices of a particular type are in
service (i.e., the devices are receiving a
measurement signal and connected to a
natural gas supply that is capable of
actuating a valve or other device as
needed). Similarly, based on the
calculation methodology for the sitespecific population emission factor in
Calculation Method 2 or for the leaker
emission factor approach proposed in
Calculation Method 3, the number of
hours that the devices of a particular
type are in service (i.e., the devices are
receiving a measurement signal and
connected to a natural gas supply that
is capable of actuating a valve or other
device as needed) must be used in the
calculation, Therefore, consistent with
section II.D of this preamble, we are
proposing to revise the definition of
variable ‘‘Tt’’ in existing equation W–1
(proposed equation W–1B) in 40 CFR
98.233 and the corresponding reporting
requirements in proposed 40 CFR
98.236(b)(4)(ii)(C)(4), (b)(4)(iii)(C)(4),
and (b)(5)(i)(C)(2) to use the term ‘‘in
service (i.e., supplied with natural gas)’’
rather than ‘‘operational’’ or
‘‘operating,’’ to clarify the original and
current intended meaning of that
variable and term. We are also
proposing to use this ‘‘in service’’
language for the time variables in the
newly proposed equations W–1C and
W–1D for the leaker factor approach for
intermittent bleed pneumatic devices
under Calculation Method 3.
69 As noted previously, the development of the
current emission factors for natural gas pneumatic
devices is described in Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Reporting from the Petroleum And Natural Gas
Industry: Background Technical Support
Document, U.S. EPA, November 2010, (Docket Id.
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0923–3610), also
available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50315
5. Natural Gas Pneumatic Devices and
Natural Gas Driven Pneumatic Pumps
Routed to Control
We understand that emissions from
some natural gas pneumatic devices
and/or natural gas driven pneumatic
pumps are routed to control (i.e., a flare,
combustion unit, or vapor recovery
system). The population emission factor
is based on natural gas vented directly
to the atmosphere from these pneumatic
devices/pumps and does not accurately
reflect emissions from controlled
pneumatic devices/pumps. Therefore,
consistent with section II.B of this
preamble, we are proposing to revise 40
CFR 98.233(a) and (c) to clarify
requirements for calculating emissions
from natural gas pneumatic devices and
natural gas driven pneumatic pumps,
respectively, that are vented directly to
the atmosphere versus pneumatic
devices/pumps that are routed to
control, consistent with the intent of the
current rule. We are proposing revisions
to 40 CFR 98.233(a) and (c) to clarify
that the existing population emission
factor calculation methodology is
intended to apply only to pneumatic
devices/pumps vented directly to the
atmosphere. The proposed new
calculation methodologies described in
sections III.E.1 and 2 of this preamble
also specify that they apply only to
pneumatic devices/pumps vented
directly to the atmosphere.
We are proposing that flared
emissions from natural gas pneumatic
devices or pumps are not required to be
calculated and reported separately from
other flared emissions. We are
proposing to specify that instead
emission streams from natural gas
pneumatic devices or pumps that are
routed to flares are required to be
included in the calculation of total
emissions from the flare according to
the procedures in 40 CFR 98.233(n) and
reported as part of the total flare stack
emissions according to the procedures
in 40 CFR 98.236(n), in the same
manner as emission streams from other
source types that are routed to the flare.
Similarly, we are proposing that
emissions from natural gas pneumatic
devices or pumps that are routed to a
combustion unit are required to be
combined with other streams of the
same fuel type and used to calculate
total emissions from the combustion
unit as specified in 40 CFR 98.233(z)
and reported as part of the total
emissions from the combustion unit as
specified in 40 CFR 98.236(z). We are
also proposing reporters would not
calculate or report emissions from
natural gas pneumatic devices or pumps
if the emissions are routed to vapor
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50316
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
recovery and are not subsequently
routed to a combustion device (e.g., are
routed back to process or sales).
We are also proposing to require in
proposed 40 CFR 98.236(b)(2) and
98.236(c)(2) reporting of the total
number of continuous low bleed,
continuous high bleed, and intermittent
bleed natural gas pneumatic devices and
the total number of natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps at the site (regardless
of vent disposition), the number of these
devices/pumps that are vented to the
atmosphere for at least a portion of the
year, and the number of these devices/
pumps that are routed to control for at
least a portion of the year (which
includes natural gas pneumatic devices/
pumps routed to a flare, combustion
unit, or vapor recovery system). The
total count of pneumatic devices or
pumps is a proposed reporting element
because the total count may not always
be equal to the sum of the other two
counts. For example, a reporter that
switches from atmospheric venting to
routing to control during a year for a
particular pneumatic device or pump
would include that pneumatic device or
pump in both the count of devices or
pumps that vent directly to atmosphere
and in the count of devices or pumps
that are routed to flares. However, that
pneumatic device or pump would only
be counted once towards the total
number of pneumatic devices or pumps,
allowing us to discern the number of
devices or pumps that exclusively vent
or exclusively route to control. The
number of pneumatic devices or pumps
vented directly to the atmosphere would
be used in the verification of annual
reports to the GHGRP. The total count
of pneumatic devices or pumps at the
facility and the number of pneumatic
devices or pumps that are routed to a
flare, combustion, or vapor recovery
would provide the EPA with
information to better characterize
emissions from this source, including
how many pneumatic devices or pumps
are controlled across the industry and
how the use of controls for pneumatic
pumps changes across multiple years.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
F. Acid Gas Removal Unit Vents
1. Reporting of Methane Emissions
From Acid Gas Removal Units
Reporters currently report only CO2
emissions from AGR vents using one of
the four calculation methodologies
provided in 40 CFR 98.233(d). In the
2010 subpart W TSD, the EPA explained
that ‘‘CH4 emissions from AGR vents are
insignificant, 0.06 percent of the total
volume of CO2 and CH4 emissions,’’
leading to the decision at that time not
to require reporting of CH4 emissions
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
from AGR vents.70 However, as
described in more detail later in this
section, both the number and size of the
AGRs reported to the GHGRP in recent
years are greater than the values used in
that initial assessment, so current
nationwide CH4 emissions are likely
greater than estimated in the 2010
subpart W TSD.
To determine the potential sources to
be evaluated for inclusion in the
original subpart W, the EPA used the
emissions for the year 2006 as published
in the 2008 U.S. GHG Inventory.71 As
documented in the 2010 subpart W
TSD, the EPA estimated that AGR vents
emitted 643 MMscf of CH4 that year,
which corresponds generally to the
12,380 mt CH4 from AGR vents shown
in Table A–114 of the 2008 U.S. GHG
Inventory. The inputs for that estimate
include the emission factor for AGR
vents from Volume 14: Glycol
Dehydrators of the 1996 GRI/EPA study
(available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2023–0234), and an estimate of
about 290 AGRs at processing plants,
scaled from the 1992 estimate of 371
AGRs presented in the GRI/EPA study.
However, the emission factor in the
1996 GRI/EPA study is based on an AGR
throughput of about 35 MMscf per day,
while the average feed rate of the AGRs
reported at onshore natural gas
processing plants in RY2021 was
around 78 MMscf per day and the
average feed rate of all reported AGRs in
RY2021 was around 59 MMscf per day.
In addition, there were 391 AGRs
reported at onshore natural gas
processing plants and 579 total AGRs
reported in RY2021. In other words, the
total quantity of natural gas treated in
AGRs in RY2021 at onshore natural gas
processing plants was about three times
the total amount of natural gas
estimated to be treated by the 2008 U.S.
GHG Inventory. Therefore, the CH4
emissions from AGR vents are likely to
be significantly greater than estimated
in the 2010 subpart W TSD, and as such,
the EPA is proposing to amend 40 CFR
98.233(d) and 98.236(d) to require
calculation and reporting of those
emissions. The proposed inclusion of
reporting for emissions of CH4 from
70 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting from the
Petroleum And Natural Gas Industry: Background
Technical Support Document, U.S. EPA, November
2010, (Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0923–
3610), also available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–
0234.
71 U.S. EPA. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas
Emissions and Sinks 1990–2006. April 2008.
Available at https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/
inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks1990-2006 and in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
AGR vents would improve the coverage
of total CH4 emissions reported to
subpart W, consistent with section II.A
of this preamble. For more information
on the estimation of potential CH4
emissions from AGR vents, see the
subpart W TSD, available in the docket
for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
There are four calculation methods
currently provided in 40 CFR 98.233(d)
for calculating CO2 emissions from AGR
vents. Calculation Method 1 is to use a
continuous emissions monitoring
system (CEMS) if one is installed (40
CFR 98.233(d)(1)), and Calculation
Method 2 requires the use of a vent flow
meter if there is one installed that is not
part of a CEMS and use either a
continuous gas analyzer or quarterly gas
samples for composition (40 CFR
98.233(d)(2)). If neither a CEMS nor a
vent flow meter is installed, reporters
currently may use Calculation Method
3, engineering equations (40 CFR
98.233(d)(3)), or Calculation Method 4,
modeling simulation via software (40
CFR 98.233(d)(4)).
As part of this proposal, the EPA
evaluated the existing calculation
methods for the purpose of proposing to
require CH4 emissions from AGR vents,
and based on that assessment,
Calculation Methods 2, 3, and 4, are
generally appropriate to use for CH4.
Calculation Method 1 is not considered
an option for CH4 because the EPA is
not currently aware of continuous CH4
monitors that meet the EPA’s criteria for
CEMS.72 Therefore, the EPA is
proposing to specify that reporters must
use Calculation Method 2 to calculate
CH4 emissions if they have a vent flow
meter installed (including the flow
meter of a CO2 CEMS) and is proposing
to revise the subscripts of the variables
in equation W–3 slightly to specify that
reporters should calculate both CO2 and
CH4. If there is no vent flow meter, the
EPA is proposing that reporters would
choose between Calculation Method 3
or Calculation Method 4. For
Calculation Method 4, the EPA is
proposing to add the CH4 content of the
feed natural gas and the outlet natural
gas as parameters that must be used to
characterize emissions. This
specification is analogous to the existing
requirement to use acid gas content of
the feed natural gas and the acid gas
content of outlet natural gas to
characterize CO2 emissions. For
Calculation Method 3, the EPA is
proposing to revise the existing
equations W–4A and W–4B and to add
72 See https://www.epa.gov/emc/emc-continuousemission-monitoring-systems for more information
on CEMS.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
a new equation W–4C. With the
addition of CH4 as a component for
these equations, reporters would need to
have information on four parameters
rather than the three they currently need
to know. For more information on the
derivation of these proposed equations,
see the subpart W TSD, available in the
docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id.
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234. We
request comment on whether these are
the appropriate methods for calculating
CH4 from AGR vents, including whether
there are continuous CH4 monitors that
meet the EPA’s criteria for CEMS.
Although we used the 1996 GRI/EPA
emission factor to assess the potential
magnitude of CH4 emissions from AGR
vents, both in the 2010 subpart W TSD
and for an initial assessment of whether
to include additional reporting
requirements in this proposal, we are
not proposing use of that emission
factor as a method for calculating
emissions under subpart W. That
emission factor is based on modeling of
an average system from many years ago,
and as discussed earlier in this section,
the model AGR is much smaller than
the AGRs reported to subpart W more
recently. The emission factor is per
AGR, so it does not take into account
the feed rate of the AGR, the
concentration of CO2 entering the unit,
or the level of treatment (i.e.,
concentration of CO2 exiting the unit).
The EPA is also proposing to add
relevant reporting elements for CH4
from each AGR to 40 CFR 98.236(d).
The additional data elements include
annual CH4 emissions vented directly to
the atmosphere; annual average
volumetric fraction of CH4 in the vent
gas if using Calculation Method 2;
additional inputs for Calculation
Method 3, depending on the equation
used (i.e., as applicable, the annual
average volumetric fraction of CH4 in
the natural gas flowing out of the AGR,
annual average volumetric fraction of
CH4 content in natural gas flowing into
the AGR, annual average volumetric
fraction of CO2 in the vent gas exiting
the AGR and annual average volumetric
fraction of CH4 in the vent gas exiting
the AGR); and the CH4 content of the
feed natural gas and outlet natural gas
if using Calculation Method 4.
Finally, we note that under the
current provisions of subpart W,
reporters with AGRs routed to flares are
required to report the CO2 emissions
from the AGR that pass through the flare
as AGR vent emissions, and the
emissions that result from combustion
of any CH4 in the AGR vent stream are
reported as flare stack emissions. In the
2022 Proposed Rule, we proposed to
provide more clarity regarding how to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
determine the flow rate and
composition of the gas routed to a flare
if Calculation Method 3 or 4 were used
to calculate CO2 emissions. Because we
are proposing to require reporting of
CH4 emissions from AGR vents, there
would be no reason for subpart W to
include special provisions for AGR
vents routed to flares that are different
from the provisions for all other
emission source types routed to flares.
Instead, the EPA is proposing that AGR
vents routed to a flare would follow the
same calculation requirements as other
emission source types and would begin
reporting flared AGR emissions (CO2,
CH4, and N2O) separately from vented
AGR emissions (CO2 and CH4). See
section III.N of this preamble for more
information on the proposed flaring
calculation and reporting provisions. In
a similar amendment, we are proposing
to specify that AGR vents routed to an
engine would calculate CO2, CH4, and
N2O emissions using the provisions of
98.233(z) or subpart C, whichever is
applicable to that industry segment. We
are also proposing that AGRs routed to
a flare or engine for the entire year
would report the information in
proposed 40 CFR 98.236(d)(1) except for
the calculation method, the indication
of whether any CO2 emissions were
recovered and transferred offsite, and
the CO2 and CH4 emissions from the
unit. If the AGR routed to a flare or an
engine only for part of the year, the
other information in proposed 40 CFR
98.236(d)(1) would be required to be
reported for the part of the year in
which emissions were vented directly to
the atmosphere.
2. Calculation Method 4
Reporters with AGRs that elect to
calculate emissions using Calculation
Method 4 are currently required to
calculate emissions using any standard
simulation software package that uses
the Peng-Robinson equation of state and
speciates CO2 emissions. According to
existing 40 CFR 98.233(c)(4), the
information that must be used to
characterize emissions include natural
gas feed temperature, pressure, flow
rate, and acid gas content; outlet natural
gas acid gas content and temperature;
unit operating hours; and solvent
temperature, pressure, circulation rate,
and weight. These parameters currently
must be determined for typical
operating conditions over the calendar
year by engineering estimate and
process knowledge based on best
available data. Consistent with section
II.B of this preamble, we are proposing
that the input parameters related to the
natural gas feed that are used for the
simulation software must be obtained by
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50317
measurement. Those parameters include
natural gas feed temperature, pressure,
flow rate, acid gas content, CH4 content,
and, for nitrogen removal units, nitrogen
content. We are proposing that reporters
would collect measurements reflective
of representative operating conditions
over the time period covered by the
simulation. We are not proposing to
change the requirement that the other
parameters must be determined for
operating conditions based on
engineering estimate and process
knowledge.
We are also proposing that the
parameters that must be used to
characterize emissions should reflect
operating conditions over the time
period covered by the simulation rather
than just over the calendar year. Under
this proposed change, reporters could
continue to run the simulation once per
year with parameters that are
determined to be representative of
operating conditions over the entire
year. Alternatively, reporters would be
allowed to conduct periodic simulation
runs to cover portions of the calendar
year, as long as the entire calendar year
is covered. The reporter would then
sum the results at the end of the year to
determine annual emissions. In that
case, the parameters for each simulation
run would be determined for the
operating conditions over each
corresponding portion of the calendar
year. Finally, we are proposing to clarify
that the information reported under 40
CFR 98.236(d)(2)(ii) should be provided
on an annual basis, either as an average
across the year, or a total for the year (in
the case of operating hours for the unit).
We are also proposing an additional
change to the reported data for reporters
with AGRs that elect to calculate
emissions using Calculation Method 4.
One of the required inputs to report is
the solvent weight, in pounds per gallon
(under existing 40 CFR
98.236(d)(2)(iii)(L)). A variety of
different solvents may be used in an
AGR (e.g., chemical solvents such as
monoethanolamine (MEA) and methyl
diethanolamine (MDEA), physical
solvents such as SelexolTM and
Rectisol®), and the solubility of CO2
varies across the different types of
solvent. Requiring reporters to provide
solvent characteristics provides
information about the type of solvent
used so the emissions calculated by the
modeling run could be verified.
However, the ‘‘solvent weight’’ is the
only data element related to the
identification of the solvent that is
currently collected, and the values
reported across all reporters have been
inconsistent over the last few years,
indicating that this data element is
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50318
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
likely not clear to reporters (e.g., some
reporters appear to be providing the
density of the solvent and others appear
to be providing the amine concentration
in weight percent). In addition, the
densities of common amine-based
solvents are fairly close in value, so
even among reporters that are providing
values within the expected range of
solvent densities, we have found it
difficult to use this data element to
identify the solvent type. Finally, the
current requirement to report solvent
weight does not specify how this value
should be determined, but given the
precise values being reported, it appears
that reporters are either measuring the
solvent or reporting a specific value
provided by the vendor.
Therefore, we are proposing to replace
the existing requirement to report
solvent weight with a requirement
(proposed 40 CFR 98.236(d)(2)(iii)(N)) to
report the solvent type and, for aminebased solvents, the general composition.
Reporters would choose the solvent type
option from a pre-defined list that most
closely matches the solvent type and,
for amine-based solvents, the general
composition, used in their AGR. The
standardized response options would
include the following: ‘‘SelexolTM,’’
‘‘Rectisol®,’’ ‘‘PurisolTM,’’ ‘‘Fluor
SolventSM,’’ ‘‘BenfieldTM,’’ ‘‘20 wt%
MEA,’’ ‘‘30 wt% MEA,’’ ‘‘40 wt%
MDEA,’’ ‘‘50 wt% MDEA,’’ and ‘‘Other
(specify).’’ We are proposing to use
commercially available trade names in
this list rather than chemical
compositions, as the trade names are
more commonly used among AGR
operators and therefore more readily
available. This proposed amendment to
collect standardized information about
the solvent is expected to result in more
useful data that would improve
verification of reported data and better
characterize AGR vent emissions,
consistent with section II.C of this
preamble. It would also improve the
quality of the data reported compared to
the apparently inconsistent application
of the current requirements. In addition,
the solvent type and composition rarely
change from one year to the next, so
once the data element is reported the
first time, most reporters would be able
to copy the response from the previous
year’s reporting form each year.
Therefore, the proposal to require
reporters to select a solvent type and
composition from these standardized
responses is also expected to improve
verification and the consistency of
reported data compared to the current
requirement, consistent with section II.C
of this preamble. In the event that
reporters use more than one type of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
solvent in their AGR during the year,
the proposed reporting requirement
specifies that reporters would select the
option that corresponds to the solvent
used for the majority of the year.
3. Reporting of Flow Rates
We are proposing several
amendments to improve the quality and
verification of AGR flow rate
information, consistent with sections
II.C of this preamble. Reporters are
currently required to report the total
feed rate entering the AGR in units of
million cubic feet per year (existing 40
CFR 98.236(d)(1)(iii), proposed 40 CFR
98.236(d)(1)(iv)). The existing rule does
not specify million standard cubic feet
per year or million actual cubic feet per
year, so reporters may provide this feed
rate in either of those units of measure.
However, there is not currently a
requirement for reporters to provide the
actual temperature and pressure for the
total feed rate if it is reported in million
actual cubic feet, so it is difficult for the
EPA to tell which are the correct units
of measure. Reporters also provide flow
rates that correspond with the
calculation method chosen, and the
subpart W reporting form currently
requests the temperature and pressure
corresponding to those flow rates, but
they cannot necessarily be used to
clarify the units of measure for the total
feed rate. For example, for Calculation
Method 1 or 2, reporters provide the
annual volume of gas vented from the
AGR in cubic feet (existing 40 CFR
98.236(d)(2)(i)(B), proposed 40 CFR
98.236(d)(2)(i)(C)), but the temperature
and pressure of this vent gas does not
correlate directly to the temperature and
pressure for the AGR feed rate. In
addition, while the reporting form
requests the temperature and pressure
corresponding to various flow rates,
those data elements are not specifically
included in 40 CFR 98.236(d), so there
appears to be some inconsistency
between the flow rates reported and the
temperature and pressure reported. For
example, in some cases, the flow rate
appears to be reported in standard cubic
feet but the temperature and pressure
appear to represent actual conditions; in
these cases, the temperature and
pressure may have been the values used
to convert the flow rate from actual
conditions to the reported standard
conditions, but it is not clear. As a
result, the EPA has found it difficult to
verify the AGR flow rates in some cases.
Therefore, we are first proposing to
require that the total annual feed rate
that is required to be reported for all
AGRs regardless of the how the
emissions are calculated (existing 40
CFR 98.236(d)(1)(iii), proposed 40 CFR
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
98.236(d)(1)(iv)) would be reported at
standard conditions (i.e., in units of
MMscf per year). The revisions would
make the units of measure for this total
annual feed rate more consistent with
the natural gas throughputs reported for
each industry segment in existing 40
CFR 98.236(aa) and would standardize
the units of measure for this total annual
feed rate across all AGRs. Stakeholders
have previously indicated that standard
industry practice for either calculating
or measuring the flow of gas into or out
of an AGR would be in standard
conditions.73 Based on the data reported
from RY2015 to RY2021, the EPA
estimates that at least 80 percent of the
AGR total annual feed rates were
reported in MMscf per year (for the
remaining 20 percent of the AGRs, the
EPA either was able to determine that
the AGR feed rate was reported in
million actual cubic feet per year, or it
is unclear whether the feed rate was
reported in actual or standard
conditions). Therefore, this proposed
revision is not expected to result in
changes for the majority of the reporters
but would improve the quality of the
overall data.
Second, we are proposing to
specifically require the temperature and
pressure that correspond to the flow
rates reported for Calculation Methods
1, 2, or 3 (reporters using Calculation
Method 4 are already required to report
the temperature and pressure of the acid
gas feed, under existing 40 CFR
98.236(d)(2)(iii)(B) and (C)). Depending
on the calculation method selected,
reporters are required to provide the
vent gas flow rate, flow rate of natural
gas into the AGR, and/or the flow rate
of natural gas out of the AGR. The
calculation methodologies in existing 40
CFR 98.233(d)(1) through (3) and the
reporting requirements in existing 40
CFR 98.236(d)(2)(i) and (ii)
accommodate use of flow rates in either
actual or standard conditions to
calculate emissions. The proposed
additions, at proposed 40 CFR
98.236(d)(2)(i)(D) and (E) and
(d)(2)(ii)(I), (J), (L), and (M), specify that
reported temperature and pressure
should be the actual temperature and
pressure if the flow rate is reported in
actual conditions, or standard
temperature and pressure if the flow
rate is reported in standard conditions.
These proposed additions would
provide the EPA with the ability to
verify the emissions calculations more
73 E.g., see U.S. EPA. Response to Public
Comments on Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: 2014
Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations for
Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems, November
2014, Comment EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0512–0084–
A2, Excerpt Number 73.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
efficiently and would provide a more
consistent data set overall.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
G. Dehydrator Vents
Dehydrators are used to remove water
from produced natural gas prior to
transferring the natural gas into a
pipeline or to a gas processing facility.
Subpart W requires reporting of GHG
emissions from dehydrator vents at
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production, onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting, and
natural gas processing facilities.
Emissions are determined using one of
the calculation methodologies for glycol
dehydrators provided in existing 40 CFR
98.233(e) based on the unit’s annual
average daily natural gas throughput.
For glycol dehydrator units with an
annual average daily natural gas
throughput less than 0.4 MMscf per day,
reporters currently use population
emission factors and equation W–5 to
calculate volumetric CO2 and CH4
emissions per existing 40 CFR
98.233(e)(2) (Calculation Method 2). For
glycol dehydrator units with an annual
average daily natural gas throughput
greater than or equal to 0.4 MMscf per
day, reporters must follow the
provisions under existing 40 CFR
98.233(e)(1), which require modeling
GHG emissions using a software
program (e.g., AspenTech HYSYS® 74 or
GRI–GLYCalcTM 75) (Calculation Method
1). Facilities with desiccant dehydrators
calculate volumetric CO2 and CH4
emissions using equation W–6 and the
provisions of existing 40 CFR
98.233(e)(3) (Calculation Method 3). In
the 2022 Proposed Rule, the EPA
proposed to remove the emissions
calculation and reporting requirements
for desiccant dehydrators per 40 CFR
98.233(e)(3) and 40 CFR 98.236(e)(3).
However, to avoid potential gaps in
emissions data and improve the
accuracy of the data collected in the
GHGRP (consistent with section II.A of
this preamble), the EPA is not proposing
the removal of desiccant dehydrator
requirements in this proposal.
1. Selection of Appropriate Calculation
Methodologies for Glycol Dehydrators
As noted in section III.G of this
preamble, for dehydrators that have an
annual average of daily natural gas
throughput that is less than 0.4 MMscf
per day, reporters currently use
population emission factors and
equation W–5 to calculate volumetric
CO2 and CH4 emissions per Calculation
74 AspenTech HYSYS® software available from
AspenTech website (https://www.aspentech.com/).
75 GRI–GLYCalcTM software available from Gas
Technology Institute website (https://
sales.gastechnology.org/).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
Method 2 (40 CFR 98.233(e)(2)) and
report emissions per 40 CFR
98.236(e)(2). Reporters with glycol
dehydrators that have an annual average
of daily natural gas throughput that is
greater than or equal to 0.4 MMscf per
day are currently required to model
their dehydrator emissions per
Calculation Method 1 (40 CFR
98.233(e)(1)). Through requests
submitted to the GHGRP Help Desk and
correspondence with the EPA via eGGRT, reporters have indicated the
desire to use Calculation Method 1 for
determining emissions from dehydrators
that have a throughput that is less than
0.4 MMscf per day, as they stated that
the population emission factors
provided in 40 CFR 98.233(e)(2) are not
always representative of their
dehydrators’ actual emissions. Process
simulations and models require unitspecific inputs, so it is reasonable to
expect that they would result in more
accurate emissions estimates for
dehydrators that have differing
operating characteristics than those
used to develop the Calculation Method
2 emission factors. Therefore, we are
proposing to revise the calculation
requirements of 40 CFR 98.233(e) to
allow reporters the ability to use
Calculation Method 1 or Calculation
Method 2 when determining emissions
from dehydrators that have an annual
average of daily natural gas throughput
that is less than 0.4 MMscf per day. We
are also proposing to specify that if a
facility is required to or elects to
perform emissions modeling of a glycol
dehydrator consistent with the
methodology outlined in 40 CFR
98.233(e)(1), they must use the results of
the model for estimating emissions
under 40 CFR 98.233(e). It is the EPA’s
intention with this proposal that if
reporters conduct modeling for
environmental compliance or reporting
purposes, including but not limited to
compliance with Federal or state
regulations, air permit requirements,
annual inventory reporting, or internal
review, they would use those results for
reporting under subpart W. The EPA is
also proposing revisions to 40 CFR
98.236(e) to specify the applicable
reporting requirements based on the
selected calculation method rather than
the throughput of the dehydrator. This
amendment is expected to improve the
quality of the data collected, consistent
with section II.B of this preamble.
2. Controlled Dehydrators
In correspondence with the EPA via eGGRT, some reporters have asked the
EPA for guidance regarding calculating
emissions from dehydrators that are
routed to different control devices
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50319
throughout the reporting year (e.g.,
dehydrators that are routed to vapor
recovery and subsequently vented to
atmosphere or routed to a flare when the
vapor recovery device is not operating).
Given the proposed amendments to the
calculation methodology and reporting
of flare stack emissions (discussed in
section III.N of this preamble), we are
proposing to revise the methodologies
for calculating emissions from
dehydrator vents controlled by a vapor
recovery system, flare, or regenerator
firebox/fire tubes currently provided in
40 CFR 98.233(e)(5) and (6),
respectively. The new language in
proposed 40 CFR 98.233(e)(4) provides
a methodology for calculating emissions
vented directly to the atmosphere
during periods of time when emissions
are not routed to the vapor recovery
system, flare, or regenerator firebox/fire
tubes. For flared dehydrator emissions,
the proposed 40 CFR 98.233(e)
provisions would direct reporters to the
proposed methodologies in 40 CFR
98.233(n). As a regenerator firebox/fire
tubes does not meet the definition of a
flare per 40 CFR 98.238, we are
proposing methodologies for calculating
combusted emissions from a regenerator
firebox/fire tubes in 40 CFR 98.233(e)(5)
using the combustion source equations
W–39A, W–39B, and W–40 of 40 CFR
98.233(z)(3). We are also proposing new
reporting requirements for dehydrator
units with emissions routed to a firebox/
fire tubes in proposed 40 CFR
98.236(e)(1)(xvi) and (xvii), (e)(2)(v),
and (e)(3)(vii) that are consistent with
the reporting requirements for
combustion sources in 40 CFR
98.236(z)(2). By proposing these
amendments, the EPA seeks to enhance
the overall quality of the data collected
under the GHGRP, consistent with
sections II.B and II.D of this preamble.
The EPA is also proposing revisions
to two terms consistent with the
proposed amendments for reporting for
glycol dehydrators with an annual
average daily natural gas throughput
greater than or equal to 0.4 MMscf per
day. The EPA is proposing to amend the
definition of ‘‘dehydrator vent
emissions’’ in 40 CFR 98.6 to confirm
that dehydrator emissions reporting
should include emissions from both the
dehydrator still vent, and if applicable,
the dehydrator flash vent. We are also
proposing to remove the term ‘‘reboiler’’
from the definition, as the term
‘‘regenerator’’ refers to the same piece of
equipment. Finally, we are proposing to
expand the dehydrator control types
referenced in the definition to include
regenerator fireboxes/fire tubes and
vapor recovery systems. Additionally,
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50320
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
the EPA is proposing to amend the
definition of ‘‘vapor recovery system’’ in
40 CFR 98.6 to clarify that routing
emissions from a dehydrator regenerator
still vent or flash tank separator vent to
the regenerator firebox/fire tubes does
not qualify as vapor recovery for
purposes of 40 CFR 98.233. The EPA
has noted significant variability in the
dehydrator emissions values reported
over the past several years, with values
ranging from extremely high to almost
negligible emissions, which indicates
that there are likely inconsistencies in
how these terms are being interpreted
among subpart W reporters. In
proposing these edits, the EPA expects
to improve the quality of the emissions
data reported and confirm the original
intent of these terms.
3. Calculation Method 1 for Glycol
Dehydrators
Reporters with glycol dehydrator
units that calculate emissions using
Calculation Method 1 are currently
required to determine emissions using
any standard simulation software
package that uses the Peng-Robinson
equation of state to calculate the
equilibrium coefficient; speciates CH4
and CO2 emissions from dehydrators;
and has provisions to include
regenerator control devices, a separator
flash tank, stripping gas and a gas
injection pump or gas assist pump.
According to current 40 CFR
98.233(e)(1), the information that must
be used to characterize emissions
include natural gas feed flow rate and
water content; outlet natural gas water
content; absorbent circulation pump
type, circulation rate, and absorbent
type; use of stripping gas, use of flash
tank separator (and disposition of
recovered gas), hours operated, wet
natural gas temperature, pressure, and
composition. These parameters
currently must be determined for typical
operating conditions over the calendar
year by engineering estimate and
process knowledge based on best
available data. Consistent with section
II.B of this preamble, we are proposing
that the input parameters related to the
natural gas feed that are used for the
simulation software must be obtained by
measurement. Those parameters include
feed natural gas flow rate, feed natural
gas water content, wet natural gas
temperature and pressure at the
absorber inlet, and wet natural gas
composition. We are proposing that
reporters would collect measurements
reflective of representative operating
conditions over the time period covered
by the simulation. We are not proposing
to change the requirement that the other
parameters must be determined for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
operating conditions based on
engineering estimate and process
knowledge.
We are also proposing that the
parameters that must be used to
characterize emissions should reflect
operating conditions over the time
period covered by the simulation rather
than just over the calendar year. Under
this proposed change, reporters could
continue to run the simulation once per
year with parameters that are
determined to be representative of
operating conditions over the entire
year. Alternatively, reporters would be
allowed to conduct periodic simulation
runs to cover portions of the calendar
year, as long as the entire calendar year
is covered. The reporter would then
sum the results at the end of the year to
determine annual emissions. In that
case, the parameters for each simulation
run would be determined for the
operating conditions over each
corresponding portion of the calendar
year. Finally, we are proposing to clarify
that the information reported under 40
CFR 98.236(e)(1) should be provided on
an annual basis, either as an average
across the year, or a total for the year (in
the case of operating hours for the unit).
Subpart W currently lists two
example software options, AspenTech
HYSYS® and GRI–GLYCalcTM
(GLYCalc), that meet the software
requirements in 40 CFR 98.233(e)(1).
Reporters are not limited to only using
these two example software options.
However, the EPA recently approved
the use of ProMax 76 software
simulations for compliance with 40 CFR
part 63, subpart HH, National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
from Oil and Gas Production Facilities
(hereafter referred to as ‘‘NESHAP
HH’’).77 In the approval letter, the EPA
concluded that the ProMax model
results are typically equivalent or more
conservative when compared to the
results from the GLYCalc model and the
total capture condensation method used
76 BRE Promax® software available from BRE
website (https://www.bre.com/).
77 Letter from Steffan Johnson, Group Leader,
Measurement Technology Group, U.S. EPA Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards, to Josh
Ravichandran, Bryan Research & Engineering, LLC,
Re: Response to request for broad source categorywide approval for use of Bryan Research &
Engineering’s process simulation software,
ProMax® (ProMax) in lieu of the GRI–GLYCalcTM
software (GLYCalc) for modeling glycol dehydration
unit emissions in demonstrating compliance with
40 CFR part 63, subpart HH, National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants from Oil
and Gas Production Facilities (Subpart HH). March
31, 2022. Available at https://www.epa.gov/system/
files/documents/2022-03/ravichandran-brepromax-alt-final_147_signed.pdf and in the docket
for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
2023–0234.
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
by the EPA in its research. After
considering this issue, we expect that
ProMax meets the specifications of
existing 40 CFR 98.233(e)(1) and,
therefore, we are proposing to add
ProMax as an example software program
for calculating dehydrator emissions in
40 CFR 98.233(e)(1) for clarity for
reporters. Consistent with the EPA’s
approval of ProMax for NESHAP HH
compliance, the EPA is proposing that
if reporters elect to use ProMax, they
would be required to use version 5.0 or
above.
As stated above, the EPA indicated in
the referenced NESHAP HH ProMax
approval that ProMax emissions results
may be more conservative than
emissions calculated using GLYCalc. In
order to assess potential emissions
changes between reporting years, the
EPA is also proposing add a new
provision under 40 CFR
98.236(e)(1)(xviii) to request reporting of
the modeling software used to calculate
emissions for each dehydrator unit
using Calculation Method 1. We expect
these proposed amendments would
improve the quality of the data
collected, consistent with section II.B of
this preamble.
4. Calculation Method 1 Reporting
The EPA has reviewed the subpart W
glycol dehydrator data and reporting
requirements in existing 40 CFR
98.236(e) and has made a preliminary
determination that additional
information would help to more
accurately characterize emissions from
glycol dehydrators using Calculation
Method 1. The EPA is proposing under
40 CFR 98.236(e) to require separate
reporting of emissions for a modeled
glycol dehydrator’s still vent and flash
tank vent. These vents often use
different control techniques, so
requiring the emissions and applicable
controls from these vents to be reported
separately would ensure that emissions
are more accurately characterized. The
proposed data elements are included in
the output files from the modeling
software used for glycol dehydrators
and therefore, this provision is not
expected to be difficult for reporters to
implement. We expect these proposed
amendments would improve the quality
of the data collected, consistent with
section II.C of this preamble.78
78 In the 2022 Proposed Rule, the EPA proposed
to add several new reporting requirements for
Calculation Method 1 glycol dehydrators under 40
CFR 98.236(e)(1) in an effort to find a potential
correlation between dehydrator emissions and
operating parameters. However, after consideration
of comments received on the 2022 Proposed Rule,
we have decided not to propose these additional
elements in this proposal.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
In the 2022 Proposed Rule, the EPA
proposed to collect additional
information on Calculation Method 1
glycol dehydrators under 40 CFR
98.236(e)(1) in an effort to derive a
correlation between vent flow rate,
absorbent circulation rate, and glycol
pump type. Comments on the 2022
Proposed Rule indicated that this
additional information request would be
unnecessarily burdensome to reporters.
Therefore, we are not proposing the
reporting of additional data elements for
this purpose in this proposal.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
5. Calculation Method 2 for Glycol
Dehydrators
As noted in section III.F.3 of this
preamble, for glycol dehydrators with
an annual average daily natural gas
throughput less than 0.4 MMscf per day,
reporters currently use population
emission factors and equation W–5 to
calculate volumetric CO2 and CH4
emissions per existing 40 CFR
98.233(e)(2) and report emissions per
existing 40 CFR 98.236(e)(2). Under
these current requirements, the count of
glycol dehydrators with annual average
daily natural gas throughput less than
0.4 MMscf per day could include
dehydrators with annual average daily
natural gas throughput of 0 MMscf per
day (i.e., glycol dehydrators that were
not operated during the reporting year).
As a result, some annual reports include
a nonzero count of dehydrators per
existing 40 CFR 98.236(e)(2)(i) without
any corresponding CO2 and CH4
emissions. In these cases, it is not clear
if the reporter did not report emissions
because emissions are not expected, the
emissions data were inadvertently
omitted, or the nonzero count represents
the total count of all dehydrators with
annual average daily natural gas
throughput less than 0.4 MMscf per day,
including those that were not in use.
Therefore, the EPA is proposing to
clarify in 40 CFR 98.233(e)(2) that the
dehydrators for which emissions are
calculated should be those with annual
average daily natural gas throughput
greater than 0 MMscf per day and less
than 0.4 MMscf per day (i.e., the count
should not include dehydrators that did
not operate during the year). Similarly,
the EPA is proposing to clarify in 40
CFR 98.236(e)(2) introductory text that
the count of dehydrators in existing 40
CFR 98.236(e)(2)(i) (proposed 40 CFR
98.236(e)(2)(ii)) should also be those
with annual average daily natural gas
throughput greater than 0 MMscf per
day and less than 0.4 MMscf per day.
These proposed amendments are
expected to improve implementation
and verification of reported data,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
consistent with section III.C of this
preamble.
Additionally, the EPA is proposing
edits to the existing reporting
requirements in current 40 CFR
98.236(e)(2). Specifically, we are
proposing to revise the data collected
under current 40 CFR 98.236(e)(2)(iii)
(proposed 40 CFR 98.236(e)(2)(iv)) to
emphasize the original intent of the
rule. Currently, the requirement is to
report whether any Calculation Method
2 dehydrator emissions are routed to a
control device other than a vapor
recovery system or a flare or regenerator
firebox/fire tubes (and if so, the type of
control device(s) and count of units
routing to each control). We are
proposing to specifically state that the
reporting of ‘‘other’’ control devices
should only include control devices that
reduce CO2 and/or CH4 emissions. This
proposed revision would allow the EPA
to verify the expected reductions in
vented CO2 and/or CH4 emissions due to
the use of the control device. This
proposed amendment is expected to
improve implementation and
verification of reported data, consistent
with section III.C of this preamble.
6. Desiccant Dehydrators
Subpart W requires reporting of
desiccant dehydrators as a subcategory
of dehydrator vents. The data required
to be reported for desiccant dehydrators
is consistent with the information that
is reported for Calculation Method 2 for
small glycol dehydrators: the total
number of desiccant dehydrator units,
whether any emissions from Calculation
Method 3 units were routed to a vapor
recovery system, flare, or other control
(and if so, the count of units utilizing
each of those controls), and the vented
and/or combusted emissions from
desiccant dehydrators. In June 2022, the
EPA proposed to remove the reporting
of desiccant dehydrators; however, as
described in section II.B of this
preamble, CAA section 136(h) directs
the EPA to ensure that reporting under
subpart W reflects total CH4 emissions,
and we are no longer proposing to
remove this source. Instead, to better
implement and verify the desiccant
dehydrator data reported under subpart
W (consistent with section II.C of this
preamble), the EPA is proposing several
updates to the current desiccant
dehydrator reporting requirements of 40
CFR 98.236(e)(3).
Specifically, we are proposing to
remove the cross-references from 40
CFR 98.236(e)(3) to 40 CFR
98.236(e)(2)(i) through (iv) and instead
include all of the applicable reporting
requirements from current 40 CFR
98.236(e)(2)(i) through (iv) for
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50321
Calculation Method 2 glycol
dehydrators as reporting requirements
for Calculation Method 3 desiccant
dehydrators under 40 CFR 98.236(e)(3).
Currently, the language in 40 CFR
98.236(e)(3)(i) simply states that the
same information that is included under
40 CFR 98.236(e)(2)(i) through (iv)
should be reported for dehydrators that
use desiccant. While we acknowledge
that the current language has been
correctly interpreted by reporters as-is,
replicating the requirements under 40
CFR 98.236(e)(3) would make the rule
easier to follow and allow the EPA to
further clarify the required reporting
data elements for desiccant dehydrators.
Additionally, the EPA is proposing to
specify that only desiccant dehydrators
that were opened during the reporting
year should be included in the total
number of desiccant dehydrators at the
facility under proposed 40 CFR
98.236(e)(3)(ii). This revision would
align the reported count of desiccant
dehydrators with the applicability of
Calculation Method 3 methodology,
which requires facilities to calculate
emissions from the amount of gas
vented from vessels when they are
depressurized and opened for the
desiccant refilling process. Also, we are
proposing to require reporting of the
total volume of all opened desiccant
dehydrator vessels and the total number
of desiccant dehydrator openings in the
calendar year as new data elements
under proposed 40 CFR 98.236(e)(3)(iii)
and (iv), respectively. These data
elements are inputs into equation W–6
and should, therefore, be readily
available to facilities. With the change
to reported number of desiccant
dehydrators under proposed 40 CFR
98.233(e)(3)(ii) and the proposed
addition of the two new data elements
for vessel volume and number of vessel
openings, the EPA would be able to
more effectively verify the reported
desiccant dehydrator emissions from
each facility.
The EPA is also proposing to revise
the definitions of ‘‘dehydrator’’ and
‘‘desiccant’’ in 40 CFR 98.6 to conform
with the inclusion of desiccant
dehydrators in subpart W. Currently, the
definition of ‘‘dehydrator’’ indicates that
desiccant is an example of a liquid
absorbent. Since desiccants are solid
materials, we are proposing to remove
desiccant from the list of example liquid
absorbents and instead define
dehydrators as devices that use either a
liquid absorbent or a desiccant to
remove water vapor from a natural gas
stream. The current definition of
‘‘dehydrator’’ also indicates that the
device is used to absorb water vapor.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50322
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
However, since some desiccants work
by adsorbing water, we are proposing to
replace the word ‘‘absorb’’ with
‘‘remove.’’ The definition of ‘‘desiccant’’
indicates that desiccants ‘‘include
activated alumina, pelletized calcium
chloride, lithium chloride and granular
silica gel material.’’ We are proposing to
add ‘‘molecular sieves’’ to the list of
example desiccant because they are a
common type of desiccant. Since the list
of example desiccants is not meant to be
exhaustive or all-inclusive, we are also
proposing to replace the word
‘‘including’’ with ‘‘including, but not
limited to.’’ With these changes, the
proposed definition would clarify that
desiccants ‘‘include, but are not limited
to, molecular sieves, activated alumina,
pelletized calcium chloride, lithium
chloride and granular silica gel
material.’’ We expect these proposed
amendments would improve the overall
quality and completeness of the
emissions data collected by the GHGRP,
consistent with section II.A of this
preamble.
Consistent with the proposed
revisions to the definition of
‘‘desiccant’’ under 40 CFR 98.6, the EPA
is proposing to add two additional data
elements to the desiccant dehydrator
reporting requirements in 40 CFR
98.236(e)(3). We are proposing to
require reporting of the count of opened
desiccant dehydrators that used
deliquescing desiccant (e.g., calcium
chloride or lithium chloride) and the
count of opened desiccant dehydrators
that used regenerative desiccant (e.g.,
molecular sieves, activated alumina, or
silica gel) present at the facility
(proposed 40 CFR 98.236(e)(3)(ii)(B) and
(C), respectively). As regenerative
desiccant dehydrators are not opened as
often as deliquescing desiccant
dehydrators, the EPA would use this
new data to verify large swings in
desiccant dehydrator emissions year-toyear and to gain a better understanding
of the distribution of emissions between
the two types of desiccant dehydrators.
These proposed amendments would
improve verification of reported data
and ensure accurate reporting of
emissions, consistent with section II.C
of this preamble.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
H. Liquids Unloading
1. Selection of Calculation Method
Subpart W currently requires
reporting of emissions from well venting
for liquids unloading. Facilities
currently calculate emissions using
measured flow rates under Calculation
Method 1 (40 CFR 98.233(f)(1)) or
engineering equations under Calculation
Method 2 for unloadings without
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
plunger lifts (40 CFR 98.233(f)(2)) and
Calculation Method 3 for unloadings
with plunger lifts (40 CFR 98.233(f)(3)).
As noted in the preamble to the NSPS
OOOOb supplemental proposal,
facilities can face operational and safety
issues managing liquids unloading with
the EPA noting in the preamble that
there could be situations where ‘‘it is
technically infeasible or not safe to
perform well liquids with zero
emissions unloadings’’ (87 FR 74781,
December 6, 2022). The EPA believes
these safety and operational issues can
possibly extend to taking measurements
at wells with liquids unloading.
Therefore, the EPA is proposing to
continue providing reporters the option
to use Calculation Methods 2 and 3 to
calculate emissions from liquids
unloading. Both equations rely on wellspecific data, including well depth,
tubing or casing diameter, and the flow
line rate of gas, to calculate well-level
emissions. However, consistent with
section II.B of this preamble, the EPA is
proposing that reporters with liquids
unloadings must calculate emissions
from unloadings for each well at least
once every 3 consecutive calendar years
or more frequently using Calculation
Method 1 to ensure that the engineering
equations accurately and consistently
represent the quantity of emissions from
unloading events.
To implement this change, the EPA is
proposing to amend the introductory
text in 40 CFR 98.233(f) to add the
requirement that reporters must use
Calculation Method 1 to calculate
emissions from well venting for liquids
unloading every 3 consecutive calendar
years or more frequently. Calculation
Method 1 currently requires reporters to
install a recording flow meter on the
vent line used to vent gas from the well
to a separator or atmospheric tank and
measure the flow rate of the unloading
events. The reporter must measure flow
rates at one or more wells in each subbasin combination (sub-basin/plunger
lift indicator/automated/manual
indicator) where wells are subject to
liquids unloading events. The average
measured flow rate in standard cubic
feet per hour is then applied to each
well with unloadings in the same subbasin combination for the time in hours
during the year the well is unloaded. To
support implementation of this
requirement, the EPA is proposing to
add 40 CFR 98.236(f)(2)(xi)(D) and
98.236(f)(2)(xii)(D) to require reporters
to report the most recent calendar year
Calculation Method 1 was used to
calculate emissions from unloadings for
the same sub-basin combination.
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
2. Reporting for Calculation Methods 2
and 3
Under the current reporting
requirements of 40 CFR 98.236(f),
facilities must report whether plunger
lifts were used when using Calculation
Method 1 and must report the data
elements used in equations W–7A and
W–7B. For Calculation Methods 2 and 3,
however, reporters currently only report
a subset of the data elements used to
calculate emissions in equations W–8
and W–9. Specifically, for Calculation
Methods 2 and 3, reporters must
provide a plunger lift indicator (i.e.,
whether plunger lifts were used), total
number of wells with well venting for
liquids unloading, the total number of
unloading events, and the casing
diameter (Calculation Method 2) or the
tubing diameter (Calculation Method 3).
In a 2019 study, Zaimes et al.79
evaluated various liquid unloading
scenarios, and the results indicated that
differentiating emissions only on the
basis of type of unloading (plunger or
non-plunger lift) may not accurately
assess emissions from this source. In
particular, Zaimes et al. noted that type
of unloading should be further
differentiated for plunger lift unloadings
between automated and manual
unloadings, suggesting further
granularity is necessary to properly
characterize emissions. In particular,
there could be significant differences in
the number and duration of unloadings
and, hence, differences in emissions
between manual and automated plunger
lift unloadings and liquids unloading
emissions. A manual unloading occurs
when field personnel attend to the well
at the well-pad, for example, to
manually plunge a well at the site using
a rig or other method, to open a valve
to direct flow to an atmospheric tank to
clear the well, or to manually shut-in
the well to allow pressure to build in
the well-bore. Manual unloadings may
be performed on a routine schedule or
on ‘‘as needed’’ basis. An automated
unloading is performed without manual
interference. Examples of an automated
unloading include a timing and/or
pressure device used to optimize
intermittent shut-in of the well before
liquids choke off gas flow or to open
and close valves, continually operating
equipment that does not require
presence of an operator such as rod
pumping units, automated and
unmanned plunger lifts, or other
79 Zaimes, G.G. et al. ‘‘Characterizing Regional
Methane Emissions from Natural Gas Liquid
Unloading.’’ Environ. Sci. Technol. 2019, 53, 4619–
4629. Available in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
unloading activities that do not entail a
physical presence at the well-pad.
The Zaimes et al. study did not
evaluate manual and automated nonplunger lift unloadings separately, but
further differentiating non-plunger lift
unloadings between manual and
automated unloadings in subpart W
could also improve data quality.
Correspondence with reporters via eGGRT since subpart W reporting for the
onshore production segment began in
2011 indicates potentially meaningful
differences in the number of unloadings
and emissions for manual versus
automated non-plunger lift unloadings.
When the EPA finalized the calculation
methods and reporting requirements for
well venting for liquids unloading, the
reporting requirements did not
differentiate between manual and
automated non-plunger lift unloadings.
However, reporters have clearly
affirmed the use of automated nonplunger lift unloadings in response to
multiple inquiries the EPA has made as
part of the annual report verification
process.
In addition, there are several data
elements used to calculate emissions
from liquids unloading in equations W–
8 and W–9 for Calculation Methods 2
and 3 that are not currently required to
be provided. Specifically, reporters do
not report well depth (Calculation
Method 2) or tubing depth (Calculation
Method 3), the average flow-line rate of
gas, the hours that wells are left open to
the atmosphere during unloading
events, and the shut-in, surface or
casing pressure (Calculation Method 2)
or the flow-line pressure (Calculation
Method 3). Requiring reporting of these
data elements would improve
verification of annual reports to the
GHGRP and would allow the EPA and
the public to replicate calculations and
more confidently confirm reported
calculated emissions than is currently
possible.
The EPA is, therefore, proposing to
revise the reporting requirements in 40
CFR 98.236(f)(1) and (2) to require
reporters to include the following data
elements, consistent with section II.C of
this preamble. In 40 CFR 98.236(f)(1),
for Calculation Method 1, the EPA is
proposing that reporters would identify
the type of unloading as an automated
or manual unloading in addition to
identifying whether the unloading is a
plunger lift or non-plunger lift
unloading. We are also proposing in 40
CFR 98.236(f)(1) that reporters would
report emissions by unloading type
combination (with or without plunger
lifts, automated or manual unloading).
In addition, for each individual
Calculation Method 1 well that was
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
tested during the year, we are proposing
that reporters would specify the type of
unloading as automated or manual
unloading under 40 CFR
98.236(f)(1)(xi)(F) or 40 CFR
98.236(f)(1)(xii)(F), as applicable.
For non-plunger lift unloadings that
use Calculation Method 2 in 40 CFR
98.233(f)(2), the EPA is proposing in 40
CFR 98.236(f)(2) that reporters would
identify the type of non-plunger lift
unloading as automated or manual nonplunger lift unloading and that reporters
would report emissions and activity
data separately for each unloading type
combination. In addition, for each well
with non-plunger lift unloadings, the
EPA is proposing to revise and add
requirements in existing 40 CFR
98.236(f)(2)(ix) (proposed 40 CFR
98.236(f)(2)(xi) in this proposed rule) to
report the well depth for each well
(WDp) and the shut-in pressure, casing
pressure or surface pressure for each
well, (SPp). Reporters would continue to
report the internal casing diameter (CDp)
as is currently required for non-plunger
lift unloadings.
For plunger lift unloadings that use
Calculation Method 3 in 40 CFR
98.233(f)(3), the EPA is proposing in 40
CFR 98.236(f)(2) that reporters would
identify the type of plunger lift
unloading as automated or manual
plunger lift unloading and that reporters
would report emissions and activity
data separately for each unloading type
combination. In addition, for all each
well with plunger lift unloadings, the
EPA is proposing to revise and add
requirements in existing 40 CFR
98.236(f)(2)(x) (proposed 40 CFR
98.236(f)(2)(xii) in this proposed rule) to
report the tubing depth (WDp) and the
flow-line pressure for each well in the
sub-basin (SPp). Reporters would
continue to report the internal tubing
diameter (TDp) as is currently required
for plunger lift unloadings.
Finally, for each well with unloadings
that uses Calculation Method 2 or 3, the
EPA is proposing to add new
requirements, as proposed 40 CFR
98.236(f)(2)(ix) and (x), to report the
flow-line rate of gas (SFRp) and the
cumulative number of hours that the
well is left open to the atmosphere
during unloading events (HRp,q),
respectively.
To encourage accurate classification
of manual and automated unloadings for
all calculation methods, the EPA is
proposing to add new terms in 40 CFR
98.238 for ‘‘Manual liquids unloading’’
and ‘‘Automated liquids unloading.’’
The terms are proposed to be defined
consistent with the descriptions
provided earlier in this section of this
preamble.
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50323
3. Other Clarifying Amendments
The EPA is proposing an additional
amendment to add clarity for reporters
with liquids unloadings. The EPA is
proposing to specify in the introductory
text for 40 CFR 98.233(f) that calculation
of emissions from unloading events is
required only when the well is
unloaded to the atmosphere or to a
control device. The EPA is proposing
this change because these unloadings
are the events that result in emissions of
GHG to the atmosphere. The proposed
change, consistent with sections II.C
and II.D of this preamble, is intended to
provide clarity to reporters while also
ensuring that the EPA continues to
receive accurate and relevant data.
I. Gas Well Completions and Workovers
With Hydraulic Fracturing
Reporters currently may use equation
W–10A or W–10B to calculate emissions
from gas well completions and
workovers with hydraulic fracturing.
Equation W–10A is used to calculate
emissions from wells using inputs
obtained from a representative sample
of wells within a sub-basin and the ratio
of the gas flowback rate to the
production flow rate, and equation W–
10B is used to calculate emissions using
inputs obtained from all wells within a
sub-basin and the flow rate and flow
volume of the gas vented or flared. In
addition, reporters must use Calculation
Method 1 or Calculation Method 2 in
existing 40 CFR 98.233(g)(1) for
calculating inputs to equations W–12A
and W–12B if using equation W–10A.
Calculation Method 1 relies on direct
measurement of gas flow rate during
flowback to develop calculation inputs
whereas Calculation Method 2 uses an
engineering equation to produce a
calculated flowback. Specifically,
Calculation Method 2 uses the measured
gas pressure differential across the well
choke to estimate gas flow rate for
natural gas well completions and
workovers with hydraulic fracturing. It
is, therefore, often referred to as the
‘‘Choke Flow’’ equation. The Choke
Flow equation is only available for
hydraulically fractured natural gas well
completions and workovers. It cannot be
used for hydraulically fractured oil well
completions and workovers.
The majority of onshore production
facilities with hydraulically fractured
completions and workovers use
equation W–10B to calculate emissions.
In RY2021, 118 onshore production
facilities reported 2418 hydraulically
fractured gas well completions or
workovers. Only 15 of those facilities
used equation W–10A for emissions
calculations for 385 gas well
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50324
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
completions or workovers. It is
unknown what percentage of those
facilities use Calculation Method 2, as
the calculation methodology is not
currently reported.
Consistent with section II.B of this
preamble, the EPA is proposing to retain
equations W–10A and W–10B, but is
proposing to remove the option in 40
CFR 98.233(g)(1) for reporters to use
Calculation Method 2, the Choke Flow
equation, when using equation W–10A.
The EPA believes that measurement of
back flow rates is standard practice in
the onshore production segment,
whether through measurement of every
well completion or workover or through
measurement of a representative well or
workover. Moreover, this is supported
by the large number of reporters using
equation W–10B compared with
equation W–10A. The EPA believes this
proposal would improve reporting of
emissions from hydraulically fractured
gas well completions and workovers
while impacting very few reporters due
to the small number of reporters using
equation W–10A. The EPA understands
that some reporters may be concerned
that there could be situations where
direct measurement is not possible for
technical, operational or safety reasons;
however, subpart W provides
requirements for use of missing data
procedures as specified in 40 CFR
98.235. The EPA is requesting comment
on whether we should retain
Calculation Method 2 for gas well
completions and workovers with
hydraulic fracturing. However, if the
EPA retains Calculation Method 2
following consideration of public
comment on this proposed rulemaking,
the EPA expects we would also amend
the reporting requirements in the final
rulemaking to improve data quality and
transparency. Specifically, if
Calculation Method 2 is retained, the
EPA expects we would add a new
reporting requirement in 40 CFR
98.236(g) for reporters that use equation
W–10A to indicate whether the
backflow rate for the representative well
was determined using Calculation
Method 1 or Calculation Method 2.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
J. Blowdown Vent Stacks
1. Reporting Equipment Categories for
Pipelines
Subpart W currently requires
reporting of blowdowns either using
flow meter measurements (40 CFR
98.233(i)(3)) or using unique physical
volume calculations by equipment or
event types (40 CFR 98.233(i)(2)).
Stakeholders have indicated through
correspondence with the EPA via eGGRT and the GHGRP Help Desk that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
the descriptions of the ‘‘facility piping’’
and ‘‘pipeline venting’’ categories in 40
CFR 98.233(i)(2) as it is currently
written reference ‘‘distribution’’
pipelines but compressor stations are
generally not associated with
distribution pipelines. Therefore, the
EPA is proposing to revise the
descriptions of the facility piping and
pipeline venting categories in 40 CFR
98.233(i)(2) to reflect the EPA’s intent
regarding which equipment or event
type category is appropriate for each
blowdown, consistent with section II.D
of this preamble. Our intent is that the
‘‘facility piping’’ equipment category is
limited to unique physical volumes of
piping (i.e., piping between isolation
valves) that are located entirely within
the facility boundary. In contrast, the
intent for the ‘‘pipeline venting’’
equipment category is that a portion of
the unique physical volume of pipeline
is located outside the facility boundary
and the remainder, including the
blowdown vent stack, is located within
the facility boundary. The proposed
revisions to the equipment type
descriptions would clarify these
distinctions. Additionally, we are
proposing to remove the reference to
‘‘distribution’’ pipelines in the
description of these two categories
because we did not intend to limit the
pipeline venting category to unique
physical volumes that include such
pipelines. We agree with the industry
stakeholders who have indicated that
facilities subject to the blowdown vent
stack reporting requirements typically
are connected to other pipelines such as
gathering pipelines or transmission
pipelines, and on-site blowdowns from
sections of these pipelines should be
reported. Finally, we note that for the
‘‘facility piping’’ equipment category
and the ‘‘pipeline venting’’ equipment
category, the existing phrase ‘‘located
within a facility boundary’’ in the
descriptions of those categories
generally refers to being part of the
facility as defined by the existing
provisions of subpart A or subpart W, as
applicable, and we are not proposing to
change that portion of those
descriptions. In other words,
blowdowns from unique physical
volumes of gathering pipeline that are
entirely considered to be part of the
‘‘facility with respect to onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting’’ as defined in 40 CFR 98.238
would be assigned to the ‘‘facility
piping’’ equipment category. The
‘‘pipeline venting’’ equipment category
would only apply if the unique physical
volume includes some sections of
gathering pipelines that are not part of
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
the ‘‘facility with respect to onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting’’ as defined in 40 CFR 98.238.
2. Blowdown Equipment Types
As noted in section III.J.1 of this
preamble, subpart W currently requires
reporting of blowdowns either using
flow meter measurements (40 CFR
98.233(i)(3)) or using unique physical
volume calculations by equipment or
event types (40 CFR 98.233(i)(2)). When
the Onshore Natural Gas Transmission
Pipeline industry segment was added to
subpart W in 2015, after considering
public comments that indicated that the
existing equipment or event types were
not appropriate for the new segment, the
EPA developed new equipment or event
types that apply only for the Onshore
Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline
industry segment (80 FR 64275, October
22, 2015). The new equipment or event
types were added to the introductory
paragraph of 40 CFR 98.233(i)(2), where
the existing equipment or event types
were already located, resulting in a
complex introductory paragraph. These
changes also resulted in identical third
and last sentences in 40 CFR
98.233(i)(2) that currently read as
follows: ‘‘If a blowdown event resulted
in emissions from multiple equipment
types and the emissions cannot be
apportioned to the different equipment
types, then categorize the blowdown
event as the equipment type that
represented the largest portion of the
emissions for the blowdown event.’’
The EPA is proposing, consistent with
section II.D of this preamble, to move
the listings of event types and the
apportioning provisions to a new 40
CFR 98.233(i)(2)(iv) so that the
introductory paragraph in 40 CFR
98.233(i)(2) would be more concise and
provide clearer information regarding
which requirements are applicable for
each blowdown. Proposed 40 CFR
98.233(i)(2)(iv) includes separate
paragraphs for each set of equipment
and event type categories and would
also provide clearer information
regarding the applicable requirements
for each industry segment.
3. Blowdown Temperature and Pressure
In the 2015 amendments to subpart W
(80 FR 64262, October 22, 2015), the
EPA added the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segment and the Onshore
Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline
industry segment and specified that
both industry segments are required to
report emissions from blowdown vents.
Stakeholders representing the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting industry segment provided
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
comments on the proposed rule stating
that the proposed definition of facility
would make equipment geographically
dispersed, and blowdowns may occur
without personnel on-site or nearby,
which would make it difficult to collect
the information needed to calculate
emissions from each blowdown (80 FR
64271, October 22, 2015). After
considering those comments, the EPA
also specified in the final amendments
to equation W–14A that for emergency
blowdowns at onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities, engineering estimates based
on best available information may be
used to determine the actual
temperature and actual pressure.
Since that time, the EPA has received
questions through the GHGRP Help
Desk indicating that facilities in the
Onshore Natural Gas Transmission
Pipeline industry segment also have
unmanned blowdown vents. Given that
a ‘‘facility with respect to the onshore
natural gas transmission pipeline
segment’’ is the total mileage of natural
gas transmission pipelines owned and
operated by an onshore natural gas
transmission pipeline owner or
operator, all of the blowdown vents at
that facility would be outside the
fenceline of a transmission compression
station and would be geographically
dispersed. The EPA considers it
reasonable to assume that those
blowdown vents may also be unmanned
during an emergency blowdown, and
thus it can similarly be difficult to
collect the information needed to
calculate emissions from each
blowdown. Therefore, we are proposing
to extend the provisions in equation W–
14A of 40 CFR 98.233(i)(2)(i) that allow
use of engineering estimates based on
best available information to determine
the temperature and pressure of an
emergency blowdown to the Onshore
Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline
segment, which would align the
requirements for the two geographically
dispersed industry segments currently
required to report blowdown vent stack
emissions (Onshore Natural Gas
Transmission Pipeline and Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting) and increase clarity of
reporting requirements for Onshore
Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline
reporters, consistent with section II.D of
this preamble. As described in section
III.C.1 of this preamble, we are also
proposing to allow use of engineering
estimates to determine the temperature
and pressure for emergency blowdowns
in equation W–14A for the
geographically dispersed industry
segments that we are proposing would
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
begin reporting emissions from
blowdown vent stacks (Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production
and Natural Gas Distribution).
In addition, similar provisions to
allow use of engineering estimates based
on best available information to
determine the temperature and pressure
of an emergency blowdown were not
added to equation W–14B of 40 CFR
98.233(i)(2)(i) in 2015 (80 FR 64262,
October 22, 2015). We have reviewed
this equation and have determined that
this omission was inadvertent.
Therefore, we are proposing to add
provisions to equation W–14B of 40 CFR
98.233(i)(2)(i) to allow use of
engineering estimates to determine the
temperature and pressure of an
emergency blowdown for both the
geographically dispersed industry
segments that currently report
blowdown vent stack emissions
(Onshore Natural Gas Transmission
Pipeline and Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting) as
well as the geographically dispersed
industry segments that we are proposing
would be required to begin reporting
blowdown vent stack emissions as
described in section III.C.1 of this
preamble (Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production and Natural Gas
Distribution), consistent with equation
W–14A.
K. Atmospheric Storage Tanks
Facilities in the Onshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Production and
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting industry
segments are currently required to
report CO2 and CH4 emissions (and N2O
emissions when flared) from
atmospheric pressure fixed roof storage
tanks receiving hydrocarbon liquids
(hereafter referred to as ‘‘atmospheric
storage tanks’’).80 Reporters with gasliquid separators or onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting
non-separator equipment (e.g.,
stabilizers, slug catchers) with annual
average daily throughput of oil greater
than or equal to 10 barrels per day are
required to calculate annual CH4 and
80 As described in section III.C.3 of this preamble,
the EPA is proposing to revise the source type in
40 CFR 98.233(j) from the current name of ‘‘onshore
production and onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting storage tanks’’ to
‘‘hydrocarbon liquids and produced water storage
tanks’’ to reflect the proposal to require reporting
of storage tank emissions from additional industry
segments as well as to reflect the proposed addition
of reporting for produced water storage tanks. When
used to describe proposed amendments in this
section, the general term ‘‘atmospheric storage
tanks’’ applies to the group of hydrocarbon liquids
and produced water storage tanks that would be
reporting emissions if these proposed amendments
are finalized.
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50325
CO2 using Calculation Method 1 or 2 as
described in existing 40 CFR 98.233(j)(1)
and (2), respectively. For wells flowing
directly to atmospheric storage tanks
without passing through a separator
with throughput greater than or equal to
10 barrels per day, facilities must
calculate annual CH4 and CO2 emissions
using Calculation Method 2. For
hydrocarbon liquids flowing to gasliquid separators or non-separator
equipment or directly to atmospheric
storage tanks with throughput less than
10 barrels per day, reporters must
currently use Calculation Method 3 as
specified in existing 40 CFR 98.233(j)(3)
to calculate annual CO2 and CH4
emissions.
1. Open Thief Hatches
The purpose of a thief hatch on an
atmospheric storage tank is generally to
allow access to the contents of the tank
for sampling, gauging, and determining
liquid levels. The thief hatch also works
along with the vent valve to maintain
safe tank operating pressures. The EPA
previously evaluated emissions from
atmospheric storage tanks as part of the
2016 amendments to subpart W (81 FR
86500, November 30, 2016) and
determined that the subpart W
calculation methodology in 40 CFR
98.233(j) already includes emissions
from thief hatches or other openings on
atmospheric storage tanks in the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production and Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segments. The subpart W
calculation methodologies for controlled
atmospheric storage tanks include
procedures for determining emissions
from storage tanks with a vapor recovery
system (existing 40 CFR 98.233(j)(4))
and storage tanks with a flare (existing
40 CFR 98.233(j)(5)). The procedure for
determining emissions from a tank with
a vapor recovery system instructs
reporters to adjust the storage tank
emissions downward by the magnitude
of emissions recovered using a vapor
recovery system as determined by
engineering estimate based on best
available data (existing 40 CFR
98.233(j)(4)(i)). The procedure for
determining emissions from an
atmospheric storage tank with a flare
references 40 CFR 98.233(n), which
currently instructs reporters to use
engineering calculations based on
process knowledge, company records,
and best available data to determine the
flow to the flare if the flare does not
have a continuous flow measurement
device. If a reporter sees emissions from
a thief hatch or other opening on a
controlled atmospheric storage tank
during an equipment leak survey
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50326
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
conducted using OGI, the reporter
should consider that information as part
of the ‘‘best available data’’ used to
calculate emissions from that storage
tank.
However, it appears that reporters
may not be accurately accounting for
emissions from open thief hatches on
atmospheric storage tanks, as many
reporters claim 100 percent capture
efficiency from vapor recovery systems
and flares. In order to emphasize the
original intent of the rule and ensure the
accuracy of reported data, the EPA is
proposing several clarifying edits to 40
CFR 98.233(j)(4) and (5) (which, as
described in section III.K.3 of this
preamble, would be combined in
proposed 40 CFR 98.233(j)(4)),
consistent with sections II.B and II.C of
this preamble. We are proposing to
specifically state that emissions during
times of reduced capture efficiency are
required to be evaluated to determine if
adjustments are needed to the
calculated recovered mass from vapor
recovery units or total emissions vented
to atmosphere from tanks. Reduced
capture efficiency may occur during
periods when the control device is not
operating or is bypassed when the
control device is operating, such as
open thief hatches. The emissions that
are not captured by a vapor recovery
system or sent to a flare must be
considered when calculating emissions
from atmospheric storage tanks vented
directly to the atmosphere using
Calculation Methods 1, 2, or 3.
Further, we are proposing to provide
a calculation methodology for
determining reduced capture
efficiencies when a control device is in
use but a thief hatch is not properly
seated or closed. We are proposing to
revise existing 40 CFR 98.233(j) to
require facilities to assume that no
emissions are captured by the control
device (0 percent capture efficiency)
when the thief hatch on a tank is open
or not properly seated. As described
above, emissions during this time would
be reported as vented directly to the
atmosphere as determined using
Calculation Methods 1, 2, or 3.
Additionally, in order to accurately
quantify the time period that emissions
are vented to atmosphere from an open
or not properly seated thief hatch,
consistent with section II.B of this
preamble, the EPA is proposing in 40
CFR 98.233(j)(7) to require either the use
of a thief hatch sensor, if present and
operating, or if a thief hatch sensor is
not present and operating, visual
inspection of the tank to monitor the
thief hatch. We are proposing that if a
thief hatch sensor is present and
operating on the tank, sensor data must
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
be used to inform the periods of time
that a thief hatch is open or not properly
seated. The thief hatch sensor must be
capable of transmitting and logging data
whenever a thief hatch is open or not
properly seated and when the thief
hatch is subsequently closed. Visual
inspections would be required once per
calendar year, at a minimum, if a thief
hatch sensor is not present and
operating. If the thief hatch is required
to be monitored as a fugitive emissions
component to comply with NSPS
OOOOb or the applicable EPA-approved
state plan or the applicable Federal plan
in 40 CFR part 62, we are proposing that
visual inspections must be conducted at
least as frequent as the required visual,
audible, or olfactory fugitive emissions
components surveys described in NSPS
OOOOb or the applicable EPA-approved
state plan or the applicable Federal plan
in 40 CFR part 62, or annually
(whichever is more frequent). Similar to
the provisions of 40 CFR 98.233(q), if
one visual inspection is conducted in
the calendar year and an open or not
properly seated thief hatch is identified,
the reporter would be required to
assume that the thief hatch had been
open for the entire calendar year. If
multiple visual inspections are
conducted in the calendar year and an
open or not properly seated thief hatch
is identified, the reporter would be
required to assume that the thief hatch
had been open since the preceding
visual inspection (or the beginning of
the year if the inspection was the first
performed in a calendar year) through
the date of the visual inspection (or the
end of the year if the inspection was the
last performed in a calendar year). As
discussed in the TSD for the 2016
amendments to subpart W, we
determined that this methodology
provides an accurate quantification of
emissions and it is consistent with the
timeframe required for subpart W
annual reports.81 However, we are
requesting comment on expanding the
start date of the open thief hatch prior
to the beginning of the reporting year. In
this scenario, if the reporter can identify
the start date and it spans reporting
years, then that reporter would have to
report the vented tank emissions from
an open thief hatch that occurred in
each reporting year and, if necessary,
revise reports for the previous reporting
year. The EPA is also seeking comment
on alternative methodologies for
81 Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: Technical
Support for Leak Detection Methodology Revisions
and Confidentiality Determinations for Petroleum
and Natural Gas Systems. November 1, 2016.
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2015–0764–0066;
also available in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
quantifying the time that a thief hatch
is left open or not properly seated in
lieu of a required visual inspection.
The EPA is also proposing revisions
to the atmospheric storage tank
reporting requirements in 40 CFR
98.236(j) with regard to open thief
hatches. Specifically, the EPA is
proposing to require reporting of the
number of controlled atmospheric
storage tanks with open or not properly
seated thief hatches within the reporting
year, as well as the total volume of gas
vented through the open or not properly
seated thief hatches, for all calculation
methods. With these new reporting
elements, the EPA seeks to quantify the
impact of open thief hatches on
atmospheric storage tanks and enhance
the overall quality of the data collected
under the GHGRP, consistent with
section II.C of this preamble.
Stakeholders have voiced concerns
through the GHGRP Help Desk
regarding the potential for double
counting of tank thief hatch emissions
under 40 CFR 98.236(j), (q) and (r). The
EPA has previously confirmed that there
is no potential for double counting thief
hatches in the methodologies provided
in 40 CFR 98.233(q) and 40 CFR
98.233(r), and we have also confirmed
that there is no potential for double
counting thief hatches based on the
proposed revisions to 40 CFR 98.236(j),
(q) and (r). When determining leaks by
population count per 40 CFR 98.233(r),
the EPA is proposing updated major
equipment emission factors in existing
Table W–1A (proposed Table W–1) that
were developed using Rutherford et al.
(2021). Population emission factors are
presented by major equipment, which
includes tanks—leaks; however, the
major equipment indicating venting
emissions (e.g., tanks—unintentional
vents) were not included. For
equipment leak surveys per 40 CFR
98.233(q), existing Table W–1E
(proposed Table W–2) references 40
CFR 98.232(c)(21) and (j)(10) for
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production and onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting,
respectively. These provisions, which
describe the list of components to be
surveyed for equipment leaks,
specifically state that thief hatches or
other openings on a storage vessel
should not be considered an ‘‘other
component.’’ As such, we confirm that
the proposed thief hatch emissions
reporting requirements in 40 CFR
98.236(j) would not overlap with the
equipment leak emission reporting
requirements in 40 CFR 98.236(q) and
(r). Also, we confirm that the proposed
thief hatch emissions reporting
requirements would not overlap with
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
emissions reporting in 40 CFR
98.236(y). As stated in section III.B of
this preamble, only thief hatch
emissions that exceed the emissions
estimated under 40 CFR 98.233(j) by 250
mtCO2e or more, or 100 kg/hr of CH4 or
more, would be included in the
calculation and reporting requirements
for ‘‘other large release events.’’
The EPA is aware that there are
circumstances other than open or not
properly seated thief hatches in which
the capture efficiency of the control
device(s) for atmospheric storage tanks
is reduced. These circumstances
include, but are not limited to, when the
control device is bypassed due to an
open pressure relief device or when the
atmospheric storage tank covers and
closed vent systems have openings that
allow emissions to vent directly to
atmosphere. We are proposing in 40
CFR 98.233(j)(4)(i)(D) to require
facilities to account for time periods of
reduced capture efficiency from causes
other than open or not properly seated
thief hatches when determining total
emissions vented directly to atmosphere
based on best available data. However,
we are requesting comment on
methodologies other than best available
data for identifying and quantifying
time periods of reduced capture
efficiency in these situations. For
example, the EPA is requesting
comment on the prevalence of pressure
monitoring systems on atmospheric
storage tanks, how pressure monitoring
systems can be used to identify and
determine the duration of periods of
reduced capture efficiency due to open
pressure relief devices, and the cost of
those pressure monitoring systems.
2. Malfunctioning Dump Valves
For Onshore Petroleum and Natural
Gas Production and Onshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
facilities with atmospheric storage tank
emissions calculated using Calculation
Method 1 (40 CFR 98.233(j)(1)) or
Calculation Method 2 (40 CFR
98.233(j)(2)), reporters must also follow
the procedures in current 40 CFR
98.233(j)(6) (proposed 40 CFR
98.233(j)(5)) and use equation W–16 to
calculate emissions from occurrences of
gas-liquid separator dump valves not
closing properly. Equation W–16
estimates the annual volumetric GHG
emissions at standard conditions from
each storage tank resulting from the
malfunctioning dump valve on the gasliquid separator using a correction
factor, the total time the dump valve did
not close properly in the calendar year,
and the hourly storage tank emissions.
Per the definition of the variable ‘‘En’’ in
equation W–16, the input hourly storage
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
tank emissions should be those
calculated using Calculation Methods 1
or 2 and should be adjusted downward
by the magnitude of emissions
recovered using a vapor recovery
system, if applicable. The EPA is
proposing to revise the equation
variables (particularly the subscripts) in
equation W–16 to clarify the intent of
this equation. We are proposing to
revise the variable ‘‘En’’ to ‘‘Es,i’’ to
further clarify that these are the
volumetric atmospheric storage tank
emissions determined using the
procedures in 40 CFR 98.233(j)(1), (2),
and (4). We are also proposing to
replace the ‘‘n’’ and ‘‘o’’ subscripts in
the other variables with a ‘‘dv’’
subscript to indicate that these are the
emissions from periods when the gasliquid separator dump valves were not
closed properly and that the emissions
from these periods should be added to
the emissions determined using the
procedures in 40 CFR 98.233(j)(1), (2),
and (4).
One of the inputs to equation W–16
is the total time the dump valve did not
close properly in the calendar year (Tn).
Currently, Tn may be estimated based on
maintenance, operations, or routine
separator inspections that indicate the
period of time when the valve was
malfunctioning in open or partially
open position. In order to improve the
quality of the open dump valve
emissions data collected, consistent
with section II.C of this preamble, the
EPA is proposing to formalize the
requirement to perform routine visual
inspections of separator dump valves to
determine if the valve is stuck in an
open position, thus allowing gas carrythrough to the controlled tank(s).
The EPA is proposing to revise the
current provisions in 40 CFR
98.233(j)(6) (which is proposed 40 CFR
98.233(j)(5)) to require visual inspection
of the gas-liquid separator and
determine if the liquid dump valve is
stuck in an open or partially open
position. Incorporating this proposed
monitoring requirement would result in
a more realistic time estimate being
used in equation W–16 and thus, more
accurate emissions reporting, consistent
with section II.B of this preamble.
Visual inspections would be required
once per calendar year, at a minimum.
Similar to the provisions of 40 CFR
98.233(q) and the proposed section 40
CFR 98.233(j)(7), if one visual
inspection is conducted in the calendar
year and a stuck dump valve is
identified, the reporter would be
required to assume that the dump valve
had been stuck open for the entire
calendar year. If multiple visual
inspections are conducted in the
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50327
calendar year and a stuck dump valve
is identified, the reporter would be
required to assume that the dump valve
had been stuck open since the preceding
visual inspection (or the beginning of
the year if the inspection was the first
performed in a calendar year) through
the date of the visual inspection (or the
end of the year if the inspection was the
last performed in a calendar year). As
discussed in the TSD for the 2016
amendments to subpart W, we
determined that this methodology
provides an accurate quantification of
emissions and it is consistent with the
timeframe required for subpart W
annual reports.82 We are requesting
comment on expanding the start date of
the open thief hatch prior to the
beginning of the reporting year. In this
scenario, if the reporter can identify the
start date and it spans reporting years,
then that reporter would have to report
the vented tank emissions from an open
thief hatch that occurred in each
reporting year and, if necessary, revise
reports for the previous reporting year.
3. Applicability and Selection of
Appropriate Calculation Methodologies
for Atmospheric Storage Tanks
When determining the applicability of
the different calculation methodologies
described in existing 40 CFR 98.233(j),
reporters must calculate their annual
average daily throughput to determine
whether flow of hydrocarbon liquids
through the gas-liquid separator, well,
or non-separator equipment is greater
than or equal to 10 barrels per day.
Through the GHGRP Help Desk and
correspondence with the EPA via eGGRT, it appears that reporters may be
misinterpreting how hydrocarbon liquid
throughputs from gas-liquid separators
should be determined. Specifically,
reporters appear to have differing
conclusions regarding whether the
throughput determination should be
based on flow into or out of the
separator and whether days when the
separator was not operating should be
included when calculating the annual
average. Therefore, we are proposing
revisions to the introductory text of 40
CFR 98.233(j) to emphasize the original
intent of how the hydrocarbon liquid
throughputs should be determined.
Specifically, we are proposing to add
language that clearly states that the
annual average daily throughput of
hydrocarbon liquids should be based on
82 Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: Technical
Support for Leak Detection Methodology Revisions
and Confidentiality Determinations for Petroleum
and Natural Gas Systems. November 1, 2016.
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2015–0764–0066;
also available in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50328
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
flow out of the separator, well, or nonseparator equipment determined over
the actual days of operation. This
amendment is expected to clarify the
rule, consistent with II.D of this
preamble and improve the quality of the
data collected, consistent with section
II.C of this preamble.
For hydrocarbon liquids flowing to
gas-liquid separators or non-separator
equipment or directly to atmospheric
storage tanks with throughput greater
than 0 barrels per day and less than 10
barrels per day, reporters currently use
population emission factors and
equation W–15 to calculate volumetric
CO2 and CH4 emissions per Calculation
Method 3 (40 CFR 98.233(j)(3)) and
report emissions per 40 CFR
98.236(j)(2). However, facilities with
hydrocarbon liquids flowing to gasliquid separators or non-separator
equipment or directly to atmospheric
storage tanks with throughput greater
than or equal to 10 barrels per day are
given the option to either model their
tanks per Calculation Method 1 (40 CFR
98.233(j)(1)) or use a mass balance
approach per Calculation Method 2 (40
CFR 98.233(j)(2)). Through the GHGRP
Help Desk and correspondence with the
EPA via e-GGRT, reporters have
expressed the desire to use Calculation
Methods 1 or 2 for reporting emissions
from storage tanks currently required to
use Calculation Method 3, as they stated
that the population emission factors
provided in 40 CFR 98.233(j)(3) are not
always representative of their tanks’
actual emissions. Calculation Methods 1
and 2 require unit-specific inputs, so it
is reasonable to expect that they would
result in more accurate emissions
estimates for atmospheric storage tanks
that have differing operating
characteristics than those used to
develop the Calculation Method 3
emission factors. Therefore, the EPA is
proposing to amend the requirements in
40 CFR 98.233(j) to specify reporters
may use Calculation Method 1,
Calculation Method 2, or Calculation
Method 3 when determining emissions
from hydrocarbon liquids flowing to
wells, gas-liquid separators, or nonseparator equipment with throughput
greater than 0 barrels per day and less
than 10 barrels per day. We are also
proposing to specify in 40 CFR 98.233(j)
that if a reporter is required or elects to
perform emissions modeling of an
atmospheric storage tank consistent
with the methodology outlined in 40
CFR 98.233(j)(1), they must use the
results of the model for estimating
emissions under 40 CFR 98.233(j). It is
the EPA’s intention with this proposal
that if reporters conduct modeling for
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
environmental compliance or reporting
purposes, including but not limited to
compliance with Federal or state
regulations, air permit requirements,
annual inventory reporting, or internal
review, they would use those results for
reporting under subpart W. Consistent
revisions are also proposed for the
reporting requirements in 40 CFR
98.236(j). These amendments are
expected to improve the quality of the
data collected and provide flexibility to
reporters, consistent with section II.D of
this preamble.
The current requirements in 40 CFR
98.233(j) require calculation of
emissions from atmospheric pressure
fixed roof storage tanks. As discussed in
section III.C of this preamble, the EPA
evaluated the sources included in
present-day inventories of the oil and
gas industry in comparison with sources
covered in subpart W and is proposing
to include additional sources in subpart
W as a result of this evaluation. Based
on a similar evaluation, we are
proposing to remove the ‘‘fixed roof’’
language when referring to atmospheric
pressure storage tanks subject to 40 CFR
98.233(j). This would expand the
reporting of tank emissions to include
floating roof tanks, which are a source
included in the 2022 U.S. GHG
Inventory for the petroleum industry.
We are also proposing revisions to
existing 40 CFR 98.236(j)(1)(x) and
existing 40 CFR 98.236(j)(2)(i) to require
separate reporting of the total count of
fixed roof and floating roof tanks at the
facility. To provide additional clarity for
this proposed amendment, we are also
proposing to revise all instances of
‘‘storage tanks,’’ ‘‘atmospheric tanks,’’
and ‘‘tanks’’ in 40 CFR 98.233(j) and 40
CFR 98.236(j) to instead use the term
‘‘atmospheric pressure storage tanks.’’
We are proposing to define an
atmospheric pressure storage tank as ‘‘a
vessel (excluding sumps) operating at
atmospheric pressure that is designed to
contain an accumulation of crude oil,
condensate, intermediate hydrocarbon
liquids, or produced water and that is
constructed entirely of non-earthen
materials (e.g., wood, concrete, steel,
plastic) that provide structural support.
Atmospheric pressure storage tanks
include both fixed roof tanks and
floating roof tanks. Floating roof tanks
include tanks with either an internal
floating roof or an external floating
roof.’’ We expect these proposed
amendments would improve the overall
quality and completeness of the
emissions data collected by the GHGRP,
consistent with section II.A of this
preamble.
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
4. Controlled Atmospheric Storage
Tanks
In correspondence with the EPA via eGGRT, some reporters have asked the
EPA for guidance regarding calculating
emissions from atmospheric storage
tanks that are routed to different control
devices throughout the reporting year
(e.g., tanks that are routed to vapor
recovery and subsequently vented to
atmosphere or routed to a flare when the
vapor recovery device is not operating).
Given the proposed amendments to the
calculation methodology and reporting
of flare stack emissions (discussed in
section III.N of this preamble), we are
proposing to revise the methodologies
for calculating emissions from tanks
controlled by a vapor recovery system or
a flare currently provided in 40 CFR
98.233(j)(4) and (5), respectively. The
new language in proposed 40 CFR
98.233(j)(4)(i) provides a methodology
for calculating emissions vented to
atmosphere during periods of reduced
capture efficiency of the vapor recovery
system or flare (e.g., when a thief hatch
is open or not properly seated). The
provisions of proposed 40 CFR
98.233(j)(4)(ii) would require facilities
to use engineering estimates based on
best available data to calculate
recovered mass from vapor recovery
systems, and also clarifies that reporters
must take into account periods with
reduced capture efficiency of the vapor
recovery system (e.g., when a thief hatch
is open or not properly seated or when
the vapor recovery system is down for
maintenance) when calculating mass
recovered. For flared atmospheric
storage tank emissions, the proposed 40
CFR 98.233(j) provisions would direct
reporters to the proposed methodologies
in 40 CFR 98.233(n). By proposing these
amendments, the EPA seeks to enhance
the overall quality of the data collected
under the GHGRP, consistent with
section II.D of this preamble.
5. Calculation Methods 1 and 2 for
Atmospheric Storage Tanks
Reporters with atmospheric storage
tanks that calculate emissions using
Calculation Method 1 are currently
required to determine emissions using
any standard simulation software
package that uses the Peng-Robinson
equation of state, models flashing
emissions, and speciates CH4 and CO2
emissions from the atmospheric storage
tank. According to current 40 CFR
98.233(j)(1), the information that must
be used to characterize emissions
include separator or non-separator
equipment temperature and pressure,
sales or stabilized hydrocarbon liquids
API gravity, sales or stabilized
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
hydrocarbon liquids production rate,
ambient air temperature and pressure,
and separator or non-separator
equipment hydrocarbon liquids
composition and Reid vapor pressure.
These parameters currently must be
determined for typical operating
conditions over the calendar year by
engineering estimate and process
knowledge based on best available data.
Consistent with section II.B of this
preamble, we are proposing that the
input parameters related to the
hydrocarbon liquid stream that are used
for the simulation software must be
obtained by measurement.83 Those
parameters include separator or nonseparator equipment temperature and
pressure, sales or stabilized
hydrocarbon liquids API gravity, sales
or stabilized hydrocarbon liquids
production rate, and separator or nonseparator equipment hydrocarbon
liquids composition and Reid vapor
pressure. We are proposing that
reporters would collect measurements
reflective of representative operating
conditions over the time period covered
by the simulation. We are not proposing
to change the requirement that the other
parameters must be determined for
operating conditions based on
engineering estimate and process
knowledge.
We are also proposing that the
parameters that must be used to
characterize emissions should reflect
operating conditions over the time
period covered by the simulation rather
than just over the calendar year. Under
this proposed change, reporters could
continue to run the simulation once per
year with parameters that are
determined to be representative of
operating conditions over the entire
year. Alternatively, reporters would be
allowed to conduct periodic simulation
runs to cover portions of the calendar
year, as long as the entire calendar year
is covered. The reporter would then
sum the results at the end of the year to
determine annual emissions. In that
case, the parameters for each simulation
run would be determined for the
operating conditions over each
corresponding portion of the calendar
year.
For reporters with atmospheric
storage tanks that calculate emissions
using Calculation Method 2, all CH4 and
CO2 in solution are assumed to be
emitted from hydrocarbon liquids. For
flow to storage tanks after passing
through a separator, the CH4 and CO2 in
83 As described in section III.C.3 of this preamble,
the EPA is also proposing to expand the
applicability of 40 CFR 98.233(j)(1) to include
produced water tanks.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
solution is determined by taking a
sample of separator hydrocarbon liquids
at separator pressure and temperature.
However, for flow to atmospheric
storage tanks direct from wells and flow
to atmospheric storage tanks direct from
non-separator equipment, facilities may
only use either the latest compositional
analysis already available at the facility
or default liquid and gas compositions
from modeling software programs to
determine the CH4 and CO2 in solution;
there is currently no requirement to take
a representative sample during the
calendar year. Consistent with these
proposed amendments for atmospheric
tanks with emissions calculated using
Calculation Method 1, the EPA is
proposing that the composition of the
liquids flowing to all tanks with
emissions calculated using Calculation
Method 2 must be obtained by
measurement, regardless of the source
from which the liquids are supplied. We
are proposing to remove the provisions
of 40 CFR 98.233(j)(2)(ii) and (iii) that
allowed for representative compositions
to be used for tanks receiving liquids
directly from wells or non-separator
equipment. These amendments are
expected to improve the accuracy of the
data collected under the GHGRP,
consistent with section II.B of this
preamble.
Similar to the provision for
dehydrators in 40 CFR 98.233(e)(1),
subpart W currently provides two
example software options, AspenTech
HYSYS® or API 4697 E&P Tank, that
meet the software requirements in 40
CFR 98.233(j)(1). Under the existing
requirements, reporters are not limited
using to these two software options
when complying with 40 CFR
98.233(j)(1). However, many reporters
have been using BRE’s ProMax software
to model their tank emissions. In
RY2021, based on responses to 40 CFR
98.236(j)(1)(ii) (name of the software
package used if using Calculation
Method 1), 59 percent of facilities
reporting emissions from Calculation
Method 1 atmospheric storage tanks
used ProMax as their modeling
software, compared to 30 percent using
API 4697 E&P Tank and 6 percent using
AspenTech HYSYS®. Given the
significant majority of reporters using
ProMax, and considering our proposed
addition and supporting rationale of
ProMax to the list of example software
options in 40 CFR 98.233(e)(1), we are
proposing to add ProMax as an example
software program for calculating
atmospheric tank emissions per 40 CFR
98.233(j)(1). Consistent with the EPA’s
proposed revisions to 40 CFR
98.233(e)(1), the EPA is proposing to
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50329
require ProMax version 5.0 or above. We
expect these proposed amendments
would improve the quality of the data
collected, consistent with section II.C of
this preamble.
Additionally, we are aware that
several process simulation software
options have the ability to model
emissions from atmospheric storage
tanks that are receiving hydrocarbon
liquids directly from wells. As such, the
EPA is proposing to amend 40 CFR
98.233(j) such that facilities with wells
flowing directly to atmospheric storage
tanks without passing through a
separator may use either Calculation
Method 1, Calculation Method 2, or, for
wells, gas-liquid separators, or nonseparator equipment with annual
average daily throughput less than 10
barrels per day, Calculation Method 3.
We are also proposing conforming edits
within 40 CFR 98.233(j)(1) and (2) and
40 CFR 98.236(j)(1) to refer to
parameters and requirements for wells
flowing directly to atmospheric storage
tanks. These proposed amendments are
expected to improve the accuracy of
reported emissions, consistent with
section II.B of this preamble.
Stakeholders have indicated through
correspondence with the EPA via eGGRT and the GHGRP Help Desk that
flash emissions from atmospheric
storage tanks are often determined
through laboratory measurement of
separator liquid gas to oil ratio (GOR).
This emission calculation methodology
involves taking a pressurized sample of
crude or condensate from an upstream
vessel (separator or non-separator
equipment) and flashing the sample in
a laboratory. To do this, part of the
sample is brought to sampling
temperature and pressure conditions,
while another portion of the sample is
brought to storage tank temperature and
pressure conditions. The amount of gas
released per volume of oil generated is
measured to estimate the GOR. The
chemical composition of the flash gas is
then analyzed and the CH4 and CO2
concentrations are determined. The
GHG emissions can be estimated by
multiplying the GOR by the crude oil or
condensate throughput, and then
applying the CH4 and/or CO2
composition to the total gas rate to
estimate the CH4 and/or CO2 emissions
from the atmospheric storage tank. The
EPA has determined that this
methodology does not meet the
requirements of Calculation Method 1
(as the emissions are not calculated
using a modeling software) or
Calculation Method 2 (as the emissions
are not calculated assuming that all the
CH4 and CO2 in solution at separator
temperature and pressure is emitted).
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50330
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
However, upon review of storage tank
emissions calculation guidance from
states such as Louisiana 84 and Texas,85
it appears that companies may be
performing this testing to meet statelevel requirements. Additionally, this
methodology is included in the 2021
API Compendium as an option for
determining atmospheric storage tank
emissions.
Therefore, we are seeking comment
on adding laboratory measurement of
the GOR from a pressurized liquid
sample as a new emission calculation
methodology for atmospheric storage
tanks under 40 CFR 98.233(j). If this
methodology were to be added to 40
CFR 98.233(j), we anticipate providing
an equation that would multiply the
measured GOR by the annual
throughput of the hydrocarbon liquid
stream to the atmospheric storage tank
(in barrels per year) to obtain the annual
volumetric flash gas emissions. The CO2
and CH4 emissions from the
atmospheric storage tank would then be
calculated using CO2 and CH4 flash gas
concentrations determined from the
laboratory analysis. Facilities utilizing
this methodology would report all data
elements required under 40 CFR
98.236(j)(1), consistent with the
reporting for Calculation Methods 1 and
2. We would also require additional
data elements associated specifically
with this new calculation method, such
as the annual average GOR and total
days of operation of the atmospheric
storage tank(s) at the facility, well-pad,
or gathering and boosting site. We
specifically request comment on the
accuracy of this methodology for
calculating GHG emissions (with
emphasis on comparison with
Calculation Method 1 modeling), as well
as how extensive its use may be in the
oil and gas industry.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
6. Calculation Methods 1 and 2
Reporting
For facilities reporting atmospheric
storage tank emissions calculated using
Calculation Method 1 or Calculation
Method 2, 40 CFR 98.236(j)(1) currently
requires reporting of counts of the total
number of atmospheric storage tanks
84 Louisiana Department Of Environmental
Quality. ‘‘Flash Gas Calculation Methods.’’ https://
www.deq.louisiana.gov/page/flash-gas-calculationmethods.
85 Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
Air Permits Division. May 2012. Calculating
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) Flash
Emissions from Crude Oil and Condensate Tanks at
Oil and Gas Production Sites. Air Permit Reference
Guide APDG 5942. Available at https://www.tceq.
texas.gov/assets/public/permitting/air/Guidance/
NewSourceReview/guidance_flashemission.pdf and
in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
within the sub-basin or county (40 CFR
98.236(j)(1)(x)), the number of
atmospheric storage tanks that are
controlled by a vapor recovery system
(40 CFR 98.236(j)(1)(xii)(A)), the number
of atmospheric storage tanks that are
controlled by a flare (40 CFR
98.236(j)(1)(xiv)(A)), and the number of
atmospheric storage tanks that are not
controlled by either a vapor recovery
system or a flare (40 CFR
98.236(j)(1)(xiii)(A)).86 Given the
proposed amendments to require
reporting of CO2, CH4, and N2O
emissions from atmospheric storage
tanks controlled by a flare under 40 CFR
98.236(n) (discussed in section III.N of
this preamble), the EPA is proposing to
reorganize the reporting requirements in
40 CFR 98.236(j)(1) to collect each of
these tank counts under 40 CFR
98.236(j)(1)(x)(A) through (F).87 The
EPA is also proposing to move the
reporting of CO2 and CH4 vented
emissions and recovered mass to
paragraph 40 CFR 98.236(j)(1)(xi)
through (xiv). With this reorganization
of the emissions reporting requirements
for atmospheric storage tanks, the EPA
expects to improve verification of
atmospheric storage tank emissions,
consistent with section II.C of this
preamble.
Additionally, the EPA is proposing to
remove the requirement to report an
estimate of the number of atmospheric
storage tanks that are not on well-pads
and that are receiving the facility’s oil
(existing 40 CFR 98.236(j)(1)(xi)),
consistent with section II.C of this
preamble. This reporting requirement is
currently, and under the proposed rule
would still be, redundant because all
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production facilities reporting
atmospheric storage tank emissions
calculated using Calculation Method 1
or Calculation Method 2 must also
report the total number of atmospheric
storage tanks in the sub-basin per
existing 40 CFR 98.236(j)(1)(x)
(proposed to be revised to the total
86 In the 2022 Proposed Rule, the EPA proposed
updates to the tank count reporting requirements in
current 40 CFR 98.236(j)(1). These revisions are not
included in this proposal, as the current tank count
reporting requirements better align with the
proposed flare stack revisions discussed in section
III.N of this preamble.
87 87 As discussed in section III.K.3 of this
preamble, the EPA is expanding this source to
include both fixed roof and floating roof
atmospheric storage tanks. The total count of tanks
within the facility is proposed to be further divided
into the count of fixed roof atmospheric storage
tanks and the count of floating roof atmospheric
storage tanks. Also, as discussed in section III.K.1
of this preamble, the EPA is also proposing to
collect the count of controlled atmospheric storage
tanks with open or not properly seated thief
hatches.
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
number of atmospheric storage tanks at
the well-pad).
Under 40 CFR 98.236(j)(1)(vii) and
(viii), reporters with atmospheric
storage tank emissions calculated using
Calculation Method 1 or Calculation
Method 2 are currently required to
provide the minimum and maximum
concentrations (mole fractions) of CO2
and CH4 in the tank flash gas. Reporting
of emissions and activity data for
atmospheric storage tanks is aggregated
at the sub-basin or county level under
the current regulations, and the
minimum and maximum flash gas
concentrations were expected to provide
the EPA with a broad characterization of
the often-significant number of tanks
reported for each sub-basin or county.
However, through correspondence with
reporters via e-GGRT, the EPA has
found that the minimum and maximum
flash gas concentrations do not
accurately represent the majority of
atmospheric storage tanks within the
reported sub-basins and counties. Thus,
the EPA is proposing to revise these two
reporting requirements to request the
flow-weighted average concentration
(mole fraction) of CO2 and CH4 in the
flash gas, rather than the minimum and
maximum values. These values would
be calculated as the sum of all products
of the concentration of CO2 or CH4 in
the flash gas for each storage tank times
the total quantity of flash gas for that
storage tank, divided by the sum of all
flash gas emissions from storage tanks.
The concentration of CO2 or CH4 in the
flash gas and the throughput for each
storage tank would be determined using
the methodologies in Calculation
Method 1 or Calculation Method 2.
Consistent with section II.C of this
preamble, the EPA expects that these
revisions would improve both the
representative nature of the data
collected and the process of verifying
annual reported atmospheric storage
tanks emissions data under the GHGRP.
7. Calculation Method 3 for
Atmospheric Storage Tanks
For hydrocarbon liquids flowing to
storage tanks from gas-liquid separators
or non-separator equipment or directly
to atmospheric storage tanks with
throughput less than 10 barrels per day,
reporters currently use population
emission factors and equation W–15 to
calculate volumetric CO2 and CH4
emissions per 40 CFR 98.233(j)(3) and
report emissions per 40 CFR
98.236(j)(2). Under these current
requirements, the count of separators,
wells, or non-separator equipment with
annual average daily throughput less
than 10 barrels per day could include
separators, wells, or non-separator
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
equipment with annual average daily
hydrocarbon liquids throughput of 0
barrels (i.e., separators, wells, or nonseparator equipment that were not
operated during the reporting year). As
a result, some annual reports include a
nonzero count of wells with and
without separators per existing 40 CFR
98.236(j)(2)(i)(E) and (F) (which, as
described in section III.K.7 of this
preamble, would be combined in
proposed 40 CFR 98.236(j)(2)(ii)(E) and
are proposed to be revised to the total
number of separators, wells, or nonseparator equipment to better match
‘‘Count’’ from equation W–15) without
any corresponding CO2 and CH4
emissions. In these cases, it is not clear
if the reporter did not report emissions
because emissions are not expected, the
emissions data were inadvertently
omitted, or the nonzero count of all
wells and separators includes those that
had no throughput.
Therefore, the EPA is proposing to
clarify in 40 CFR 98.233(j)(3) that the
separators, wells, or non-separator
equipment for which emissions are
calculated should be those with annual
average daily hydrocarbon liquids
throughput greater than 0 barrels per
day and less than 10 barrels per day
(i.e., the count should not include
separators, wells, or non-separator
equipment that had no throughput
during the year). Similarly, we are
proposing to clarify that the count of
separators, wells, or non-separator
equipment to report under proposed 40
CFR 98.236(j)(2)(ii)(E) should also be
those with annual average daily
hydrocarbon liquids throughput greater
than 0 barrels per day and less than 10
barrels per day. These amendments are
expected to improve the quality of the
data collected, consistent with section
II.C of this preamble.
8. Calculation Method 3 Reporting
The provisions in existing 40 CFR
98.236(j)(2)(ii) and (iii) currently require
facilities to separately report Calculation
Method 3 emissions from atmospheric
storage tanks that did not control
emissions with flares and those that
controlled emissions with flares,
respectively. As discussed in section
III.N of this preamble, the EPA is
proposing new reporting requirements
for atmospheric storage tanks controlled
by flares. The proposed revisions would
require all flared emissions from
atmospheric storage tanks with
emissions calculated using Calculation
Method 3 to be reported under 40 CFR
98.236(n). Therefore, the EPA is
proposing to require reporting of all
Calculation Method 3 emissions that are
vented directly to atmosphere under 40
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
CFR 98.233(j)(2)(ii).88 We are proposing
to no longer require separate reporting
of Calculation Method 3 emissions from
atmospheric storage tanks that did not
control emissions with flares and those
that controlled emissions with flares.
This proposed reporting structure
would be similar to the emissions
reporting structure for Calculation
Methods 1 and 2 atmospheric storage
tanks. Further discussion on the
reasoning behind these proposed
revisions is provided in section III.N of
this preamble. In the 2022 Proposed
Rule, we proposed to revise the
reporting structure to specify that the
reporting requirements in the current 40
CFR 98.236(j)(2)(iii) only apply to tanks
whose emissions were calculated using
Calculation Method 3 that used flares to
control emissions from at least half the
annual hydrocarbon liquids received.
As this proposed amendment would not
be consistent with the revisions to the
flare stack reporting requirements
discussed in section III.N of this
preamble, the EPA is not including
these revisions in this proposal.
For hydrocarbon liquids flowing to
gas-liquid separators or non-separator
equipment or directly to atmospheric
storage tanks with throughput less than
10 barrels per day, reporters currently
follow the Calculation Method 3
methodology specified in 40 CFR
98.233(j)(3) and equation W–15
(proposed equation W–15A). Equation
W–15 uses population emission factors
and the count of applicable separators,
wells, or non-separator equipment to
determine the annual total volumetric
GHG emissions at standard conditions.
The associated reporting requirements
in 40 CFR 98.236(j)(2)(i)(E) through (F)
require reporters to delineate the count
used in equation W–15 into the number
of wells with gas-liquid separators in
the basin and those without gas-liquid
separators. After reviewing these
reporting requirements, the EPA has
made a preliminary determination that
they are not consistent with the
language used in the definition of the
‘‘Count’’ variable in equation W–15, nor
are they inclusive of all equipment to be
included in the count. Therefore, the
EPA is proposing to revise existing 40
CFR 98.236(j)(2)(i)(E) and (F), in
combined proposed 40 CFR
98.236(j)(2)(ii)(E), to completely align
the reporting requirement with the total
‘‘Count’’ input variable in equation W–
15. We are also proposing to collect this
information at the well-pad, gathering
and boosting site, or facility level. The
88 As described in section III.C.3 of this preamble,
the EPA is proposing new reporting requirements
in 40 CFR 98.233(j)(2)(iii) for produced water tanks.
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50331
EPA proposes to amend the language in
proposed 40 CFR 98.236(j)(2)(ii)(E) to
request the total number of separators,
wells, or non-separator equipment used
to calculate Calculation Method 3
storage tank emissions. The current
language in existing 40 CFR
98.236(j)(2)(i)(E) requests the number of
wells with gas-liquid separators in the
basin, which is only a subset of the
equipment included in the ‘‘Count’’
variable. Further, the EPA is proposing
to remove the reporting requirement in
existing 40 CFR 98.236(j)(2)(i)(F) that
requires reporting of the number of
wells without gas-liquid separators in
the basin. These changes would ensure
the consistency of the requirements for
all facilities reporting atmospheric
storage tanks emissions using
Calculation Method 3 and provide
activity data that better correlates with
the calculated Calculation Method 3
atmospheric tank emissions. Consistent
with section II.C of this preamble,
reporters would no longer be required to
determine two separate counts that may
not align with the inputs used in
equation W–15.
L. Flared Transmission Storage Tank
Vent Emissions
Reporters in the transmission
compression industry segment currently
are required to report flared emissions
specific to their transmission storage
tanks under 40 CFR 98.236(k),
separately from other flare stack
emissions. In the years RY2015 through
RY2020, between one and six facilities
per year reported having a transmission
tank vent stack routed to a flare, and
each of these facilities reported no
dump valve leakage from the tanks that
were routed to flares. As a result, the
reported flared emissions from
transmission storage tank vent stacks in
each of the last 6 years have been 0 mt
of CO2, CH4, and N2O. Based on these
results, the EPA has made a preliminary
determination that including flared
emissions from transmission storage
tank vents in the group of ‘‘other flared
sources’’ instead of continuing to report
source-specific flared emissions from
transmission tanks would not affect data
quality or accuracy, nor would it
significantly impact the EPA’s
knowledge of the industry sector,
emissions or trends. Therefore,
consistent with section II.C of this
preamble, the EPA is proposing that
transmission storage tanks (proposed to
be renamed ‘‘condensate storage tanks’’
as described in section III.C.1 of this
preamble) be classified as an ‘‘other’’
flared source such that any flared
emissions from the tanks in the future
would be reported only as part of the
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50332
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
total emissions from the flare. The
proposed disaggregation of total flare
emissions to individual source types as
described in section III.N of this
preamble would not apply to
condensate storage tanks.
To implement this change for
condensate storage tanks that are
connected to a flare, the EPA is
proposing to remove the current
requirements in 40 CFR 98.233(k)(5)
that require reporters to monitor the
tank vent stack annually for leaks and
to quantify the leak rate if a leak is
detected. Reporting requirements would
remain essentially the same except that
flared mass emissions would no longer
be reported under 40 CFR 98.236(k)(3).
Note that if we decide not to finalize the
proposed changes described in this
section after considering public
comment, then we alternatively propose
that we would finalize provisions
applying the proposed flare emissions
disaggregation requirements as
described in section III.N of this
preamble to flared emissions from
condensate storage tank vent stacks,
consistent with the proposed
disaggregation of emissions for other
source types. Under this alternative,
condensate storage tanks would be
added to the list of source types in
proposed 40 CFR 98.233(n)(10) for
which disaggregation would be
required. We would also not finalize the
proposal to remove the current
requirements in 40 CFR 98.233(k)(5) to
monitor and quantify leak rates because
it would not be possible to tell how
much of the total flare emissions should
be disaggregated to condensate storage
tanks if the scrubber dump valve
leakage is not monitored. We request
comment on the advantages and
disadvantages of both approaches we
are considering relative to the current
requirements.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
M. Associated Gas Venting and Flaring
1. Associated Gas Venting
Associated gas venting or flaring is
the venting or flaring of natural gas that
originates at wellheads that also
produce hydrocarbon liquids and occurs
either in a discrete gaseous phase at the
wellhead or is released from the liquid
hydrocarbon phase by separation.
Venting associated gas involves directly
releasing associated gas into the
atmosphere at the well-pad or tank
battery. Flaring associated gas is a
common, and usually preferred,
alternative to venting for safety and
environmental reasons. Subpart W
currently requires reporters to calculate
annual emissions from associated gas
venting and flaring using equation W–
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
18, which uses the GOR, volume of oil
produced, and volume of associated gas
sent to sales to calculate the volume of
gas vented. Associated gas venting
emissions are then calculated using the
results of equation W–18 and the gas
composition determined using 40 CFR
98.233(u), and associated gas flaring
emissions are calculated by applying the
calculation method of flare stacks in 40
CFR 98.233(n) to the associated natural
gas volume and gas composition
determined for the associated gas stream
routed to the flare.
For associated gas venting emissions,
we are proposing provisions in 40 CFR
98.233(m)(3) to specify that if the
reporter measures the flow to a vent
using a continuous flow measurement
device the reporter must use the
measured flow volumes to calculate the
volume of gas vented rather than using
equation W–18. This proposed
amendment would add calculation
methodologies based on measurements
and improve the accuracy of the data
collected, consistent with section II.B of
this preamble. We are proposing
corresponding reporting requirements
for associated gas venting emissions in
40 CFR 98.236(m)(7), including
requiring an indication of whether a
continuous flow monitor or continuous
composition analyzer was used. We are
also proposing to require reporting of
the flow-weighted mole fractions of CH4
and CO2 and the total volume of
associated gas vented from the well, in
standard cubic feet for all wells whether
using GOR or continuous flow
measurement devices. Finally, we are
proposing to specify that if the
volumetric emissions from associated
gas venting and flaring were determined
using a continuous flow measurement
device rather than equation W–18, then
reporting of the inputs to equation W–
18, including the GOR, the volume of oil
produced, and the volume of gas sent to
sales for wells with associated gas
venting or flaring, would not be
required for that well. We request
comment on whether we should
continue to require reporting of these
data elements even if they are not used
as inputs to an emissions calculation. 40
CFR 98.236(m)(7)(i) currently requires
the reporter to provide the total number
of wells and a list of well IDs in the subbasin for wells that vented associated
gas emissions. As noted in section III.D
of this preamble, however, the EPA is
proposing that reporters begin reporting
information for this emission source by
well rather than at the sub-basin level.
Therefore, we are proposing to remove
this reporting requirement. The well ID
would be reported for each vented well
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
under proposed 40 CFR 98.236(m)(1)
and the total number of wells reported
at the sub-basin level is no longer
necessary, because we are proposing to
require reporting at the well level for
associated gas venting rather than the
sub-basin level.
As discussed further in section III.N
of this preamble, the EPA is proposing
several amendments to the calculation
and reporting requirements for flare
stacks that would impact associated gas
flaring emissions calculations in
existing 40 CFR 98.233(m)(5) and
reporting in existing 40 CFR
98.236(m)(8). As a result, the EPA is
proposing to remove existing 40 CFR
98.233(m)(5) and instead direct
reporters to 40 CFR 98.233(n) to
calculate emissions from associated gas
flaring. The EPA is also proposing to
remove 40 CFR 98.236(m)(8), as flared
emissions would be reported under 40
CFR 98.236(n). In addition to flared
emissions, 40 CFR 98.236(m)(8)(i)
currently requires the reporter to
provide a list of well IDs in the subbasin for wells that flared associated gas
emissions. As noted in section III.D of
this preamble, however, the EPA is
proposing that reporters begin reporting
information for this emission source by
well rather than at the sub-basin level.
Existing 40 CFR 98.236(m)(3) requires
reporters to indicate whether any
associated gas was flared. The EPA is
not proposing to revise this
requirement. Thus, reporters would still
be required to indicate whether
associated gas was flared but would
report this information at the well level
rather than the sub-basin level under the
proposed rule. Retaining the
requirement to provide a list of well IDs
as required by current 40 CFR
98.236(m)(8)(i) would effectively
duplicate the proposed requirement to
indicate if associated gas is flared in 40
CFR 98.236(m)(3) for each well.
Therefore, the EPA is proposing to
remove existing 40 CFR 98.236(m)(8)(i)
in addition to all other requirements in
40 CFR 98.236(m)(8).
2. Oil and Gas Volumes
As noted previously in this section,
subpart W currently requires reporters
to calculate annual emissions from
associated gas venting and flaring using
equation W–18. Two of the inputs in the
equation are the volume of oil produced
and volume of associated gas sent to
sales for each well in the sub-basin
during time periods in which associated
gas was vented or flared. However,
based on the values initially reported in
some annual GHGRP reports and
correspondence with reporters via eGGRT, it appears that reporters, in a
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
limited number of cases, may have
incorrectly interpreted the language of
equation W–18 to require reporting of
gas sent to sales summed across all subbasins at the facility during time periods
in which associated gas was vented or
flared under existing 40 CFR
98.236(m)(6) rather than gas sent to
sales in the sub-basin during these
flaring and venting periods. Thus, the
total sales volume reported for the
associated gas source in these instances
is the same as the total volume of gas
sent to sales for the facility reported
under existing 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(1)(i)(B). If these reporters are
accurately reporting the volume of gas
sent to sales during flaring and venting
associated gas events and using that
volume in equation W–18, then the
associated gas venting and flaring
emissions are likely overstated, as it is
unlikely that all wells are venting or
flaring associated gas 100 percent of the
time. If the reporters are using accurate
volumes of gas sent to sales during time
periods in which associated gas was
vented or flared for their emissions
calculations but reporting total gas sent
to sales, then the activity data reported
do not match the emissions, leading to
an inconsistent data set. Therefore, the
EPA is proposing to add the word
‘‘only’’ to the definitions of the terms
Vp,q and SGp,q in equation W–18 (40 CFR
98.233(m)(3)) and to the reporting
requirements for those data elements in
40 CFR 98.236(m)(5) and (6).These
proposed amendments would lead to
improved accuracy of reported
emissions, consistent with sections II.C
and II.D of this preamble.
The EPA is further proposing to
clarify the definition of the variable
SGp,q in equation W–18 to account for
associated gas used at the facility.
Currently, the term is defined as
‘‘Volume of associated gas sent to sales,
for well p in sub-basin q, in standard
cubic feet of gas in the calendar year
during time periods in which associated
gas was vented or flared.’’ That volume
is subtracted from the total volume of
associated gas produced to provide a net
volume of gas sent to a vent or flare at
each well. However, an operator may
use the produced gas at the well-pad,
further reducing the volume of gas sent
to sales. For example, produced gas is
often used as fuel for internal
combustion engines or for separators.
For this reason, the EPA is proposing to
amend the definition of SGp,q in
equation W–18 to include these
additional uses. Specifically, we
propose to revise the variable name to
SGp (i.e., we propose to remove the ‘‘q’’
subscript) to indicate that the emissions
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
would no longer be summed and
reported by sub-basin (as described in
more detail in section III.D of this
proposal). We propose to define SGp as
the volume of associated gas sent to
sales or volume of associated gas used
for other purposes at the facility site,
including powering engines, separators,
safety systems and/or combustion
equipment and not flared or vented, for
well p, in standard cubic feet of gas in
the calendar year only during time
periods in which associated gas was
vented or flared. Incorporating these
proposed changes would add clarity to
equation W–18, consistent with section
II.D of this preamble, resulting in more
accurate reporting of actual volumes of
associated gas sent to a vent or flare and
thus more accurate emissions reporting,
consistent with section II.C of this
preamble. Consistent with these
changes, the EPA is also proposing to
amend reporting requirements in 40
CFR 98.236(m)(6) to clarify that SGp,q
includes associated gas that is used onsite at the facility but not sent to a flare
or vent.
N. Flare Stack Emissions
Flare stacks are an emission source
type subject to emissions reporting by
facilities in seven of the ten industry
segments in the Petroleum and Natural
Gas Systems source category.89 Total
CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions from each
flare currently are required to be
calculated using the methodology
specified in 40 CFR 98.233(n). In
addition to calculating total emissions
from a flare, reporters currently must
also separately calculate the flared
emissions from several types of
emission sources as specified in the
requirements of 40 CFR 98.233 specific
to that source type.90 The procedures in
the source-specific paragraphs of the
existing rule cross-reference the
89 Flare stacks are an emission source type
currently subject to emissions reporting by facilities
in the following industry segments: Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production, Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting,
Onshore Natural Gas Processing, Onshore Natural
Gas Transmission Compression, Underground
Natural Gas Storage, LNG Import and Export
Equipment, and LNG Storage.
90 Facilities currently separately calculate the
flared emissions from the following types of
emission sources (if required for the applicable
industry segment, per 40 CFR 98.232): dehydrator
vents (40 CFR 98.233(e)(6)), well venting during
completions and workovers with hydraulic
fracturing (40 CFR 98.233(g)(4)), gas well venting
during completions and workovers without
hydraulic fracturing (40 CFR 98.233(h)(2)), onshore
production and onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting storage tanks (40 CFR
98.233(j)(5)), transmission storage tanks (40 CFR
98.233(k)(5)), well testing venting and flaring (40
CFR 98.233(l)(6)), and associated gas venting and
flaring (40 CFR 98.233(m)(5)).
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50333
calculation procedures in existing 40
CFR 98.233(n), but they also specify that
the volume and composition of the gas
routed to the flare are required to be
determined according to the procedures
for estimating vented emissions from
the specific source type. For example,
existing 40 CFR 98.233(e)(6) specifies
that the volume and gas composition to
use in calculating flared emissions from
dehydrators must be determined
according to the procedures for
calculating vented emissions from
dehydrators as specified in existing 40
CFR 98.233(e)(1) through (5). Since
source-specific flared emissions often
are a portion of the total emissions from
a flare, existing 40 CFR 98.233(n)(9)
specifies that the total CO2, CH4, and
N2O for a particular flare must be
adjusted downward by the amount of
the source-specific emissions that are
calculated for the same flare; this
ensures that emissions from a flare are
not double counted (i.e., reported for
both the flare stacks source type and
another emission source type). The
resulting CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions
to report for that flare according to
existing 40 CFR 98.236(n)(9) through
(11) should be only what is left after
subtracting all of the source-specific
flared emissions from the total
emissions.
When a flare is dedicated to one or
more source types that are all subject to
source-specific flared emissions
reporting, all of the mass emissions are
currently reported under those source
types, and zero mass emissions are
reported for the flare stacks source
types. However, even when the only
streams routed to a flare are from source
types that are subject to flared emissions
reporting under those source types, the
flare name or ID and all activity data
related to the streams that are routed to
the flare and the flare operating
characteristics still must be reported
under existing 40 CFR 98.236(n). These
activity data include the volume of gas
routed to the flare, average CO2 and CH4
mole fractions in the flared gas, flare
combustion efficiency, fraction of flared
gas routed to the flare when it was unlit,
and indicators of whether a continuous
flow measurement device and a
continuous gas analyzer were used on
the gas stream routed to the flare. These
flare ID and activity data reporting
requirements are specified in existing 40
CFR 98.236(n)(1) through (8). In the rare
cases that a CEMS is used on the outlet
of a flare, then according to existing 40
CFR 98.236(n)(12), only the flare ID and
the measured CO2 emissions must be
reported.
The EPA is proposing changes to the
flared emissions calculation
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50334
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
methodologies, including the
monitoring provisions, as well as the
flare data reporting requirements for
both the flared emissions from each
source type and for each flare. The
proposed changes would align the flared
emissions calculation methodology and
reporting with the requirements in CAA
section 136(h) to report emissions that
are based on empirical data and that
accurately reflect the total CH4
emissions from each facility, consistent
with section II.B of this proposal. We
are also proposing changes to clarify
specific provisions.
1. Calculation Methodology for Total
Emissions from a Flare
The EPA is proposing several
revisions to the flare emission
calculation methods to improve the
quality and accuracy of the calculated
and reported data, consistent with
section II.B of this proposal. First, we
are proposing to revise the default
combustion efficiency for flares.
Currently, reporters may assume a
default combustion efficiency of 98
percent, as provided in existing 40 CFR
98.233(n)(3). However, researchers
conducting remote sensing tests of
emissions from flares have reported
finding lower combustion efficiencies.
For example, Plant et al. conducted
extensive testing in the Eagle Ford,
Bakken, and Permian basins and found
average combustion efficiencies ranging
from less than 92 percent in the Bakken
basin to slightly more than 97 percent
in the Permian basin.91 Consistent with
the requirements of CAA section 136(h),
we are proposing a tiered approach to
setting the default combustion
efficiency that would provide higher
defaults when supported by data from
the reporter implementing certain flare
monitoring procedures, in proposed 40
CFR 98.233(n)(4). Specifically, under
Tier 1, a default combustion efficiency
of 98 percent would be allowed where
the reporter conducts flare monitoring
consistent with the procedures specified
in 40 CFR 63.670 and 40 CFR 63.671 of
the National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants From
Petroleum Refineries (40 CFR part 63,
subpart CC) (hereafter referred to as
‘‘NESHAP CC’’). The standard in
NESHAP CC is to either reduce
emissions by 98 percent or comply with
the specified flare requirements, as
verified via monitoring. Therefore,
under NESHAP CC, it is presumed that
91 Plant, G., et al. 2022. ‘‘Inefficient and unlit
natural gas flares both emit large quantities of
methane.’’ Science, 377 (6614). https://doi.org/
10.1126/science.abq0385. Available in the docket
for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
2023–0234.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
complying with the flare requirements
achieve at least a 98 percent reduction
in emissions. Under Tier 2, a default
combustion efficiency of 95 percent
would be allowed if the reporter is
required to or elects to comply with the
monitoring specified in proposed 40
CFR 60.5417b(d)(1)(viii) of NSPS
OOOOb. The standard in NSPS OOOOb
is 95 percent, and it is presumed that
this standard is met when the specified
monitoring is conducted and the
corresponding activity data limits are
met. The default combustion efficiency
under Tier 3, which would apply if
neither Tier 1 nor Tier 2 requirements
are met, would be 92 percent. This
value is based on the low end of the
range of empirical results observed in
testing over an extensive area in three of
the most active basins in the United
States (U.S.) in Plant et al. Our
assessment is that this would be a
reasonable combustion efficiency for
subpart W sources that are not
monitoring as specified under Tier 1 or
Tier 2 because the overall average in the
empirical results likely included many
facilities that would comply with those
tiers and thus should be excluded from
the calculation of the average for Tier 3
flares. We are proposing Tier 3 to
provide a default combustion efficiency
that would apply before the flare owner
or operator has implemented the
monitoring that would be required to
comply with either the final NSPS
OOOOb or an approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part
62 and that would be consistent with
CAA section 136(h).
We request comment on our proposed
approach and values, including whether
available data would support the
selection of other default values for any
of the tiers. In addition, we request
comment on whether Tier 3 should be
included in the final provisions and if
so, whether the data support using a
default combustion efficiency of 92
percent or another value. If commenters
do not agree that Tier 3 is appropriate,
we request that the commenters include
what alternative approach should be
specified for reporters to use for
calculating the combustion efficiency
that would be consistent with the
requirements in CAA section 136(h) to
accurately reflect total CH4 emissions
and to base reporting on empirical data.
Under an approach where only Tier 1
and Tier 2 were included, we expect
that some period of time would be
needed for flares not subject to NSPS
OOOOb to implement the requirements,
potentially the same period of time until
the facility is subject to an approved
state plan or applicable Federal plan in
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
40 CFR part 62. We request comment on
this possible time frame and what
procedures and combustion efficiency
should be implemented in the interim.
Second, for all flares, regardless of the
tier discussed above, we are proposing
to require at least continuous parameter
monitoring to determine gas flow to the
flare. Currently, under 40 CFR
98.233(n)(1), if a continuous flow
measurement device is used on part or
all of the gas routed to the flare, then the
measured values must be used in the
calculation of emissions from the flare.
For the portion of gas not measured by
a continuous flow measurement device,
the reporter currently may estimate the
flow using engineering calculations
based on process knowledge, company
records, and best available data. We are
proposing a more defined empirical
method for determining the gas flow to
the flare, consistent with section II.B of
this proposal. Specifically, the proposed
revisions to 40 CFR 98.233(n)(1) specify
that the flow rate determination must be
based on direct measurement using a
flow meter if one is present, or if a flow
meter is not available, it must be based
on indirect calculation of flow using
continuous parameter monitoring, such
as line pressure, burner nozzle
dimensions, and appropriate
engineering calculations. We are also
proposing that the monitoring could be
conducted on either the inlet gas to the
flare or on each of the individual
streams that are combined for routing to
the flare.
Third, for all flares, regardless of the
tier discussed previously in this section,
we are proposing in 40 CFR 98.233(n)(2)
to require either continuous monitoring
(proposed 40 CFR 98.233(n)(2)(i)) or
visual inspection at least once per
month (proposed 40 CFR
98.233(n)(2)(ii)) for the presence of pilot
flame or combustion flame. During
periods when a continuous monitoring
device is out of service, we are
proposing that visual inspections be
conducted at least once per week for the
first four weeks of the outage or until a
new or repaired continuous monitoring
device is operational. If the outage is
less than one week, then we are
proposing that at least one visual
inspection must be conducted during
the time the continuous monitoring
device is out of service. If an outage
lasts more than four weeks, then we are
proposing that the reporter may switch
to conducting visual inspections at least
once per month in accordance with
proposed 40 CFR 98.233(n)(2)(ii). Data
from these measurements or
inspections, combined with continuous
flow data as described previously in this
section, would be used to determine the
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
amount of gas routed to the flare when
it was unlit. Currently, subpart W
specifies that the fraction of gas sent to
an unlit flare is to be determined by
engineering estimate and process
knowledge based on best available data
and operating records (as provided in
the definition of the variable ZU for
existing equations W–19 and W–20 of
40 CFR 98.233). Researchers conducting
remote sensing testing of flares have
identified higher percentages of unlit
flares than the average fractions of gas
routed to unlit flares reported under
subpart W.92 Although the percentage of
flares that are unlit may not equal the
fraction of gas routed to unlit flares, the
difference suggests there is a potential
for the reported fractions of gas routed
to unlit flares to be underestimated.
Therefore, we are proposing a more
defined empirical method of
determining the fraction of gas sent to
the flare when it is unlit, consistent
with section II.B of this proposal. The
proposed requirement for continuous
monitoring or periodic visual inspection
of the pilot flame or combustion flame
would provide flare-specific
information on the specific times when
the flare was unlit. The proposed
continuous determination of the flow of
gas to the flare, as described earlier in
this section, would provide an accurate
determination of the flow during the
periods when the flare is unlit.
Together, the information from both
measurements would be used to
calculate the total amount of gas routed
to the flare when it is unlit. Dividing
this amount by the total annual flow
would give the fraction sent to the flare
when it was unlit, which would be used
in equations W–19 and W–20 to
calculate the total annual CH4 and CO2
emissions, respectively, from the flare. If
a flame is not present during a visual
inspection, then the reporter must
assume it was unlit since the previous
inspection that confirmed the presence
of a flame and that it remains unlit until
the next inspection that confirms the
presence of a flame. These assumptions
are consistent with the existing
requirements for estimating the time
over which a leak occurs based on
equipment leak inspections.
Fourth, we are proposing changes to
the determination of gas composition to
make the results more accurate,
consistent with section II.B of this
proposal. Currently, under 40 CFR
98.233(n)(2), if a reporter is using a
92 See, e.g., Plant, G., et al. 2022. ‘‘Inefficient and
unlit natural gas flares both emit large quantities of
methane.’’ Science, 377 (6614). https://doi.org/
10.1126/science.abq0385. Available in the docket
for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
2023–0234.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
continuous gas composition analyzer on
gas to the flare, then the measured data
must be used in the calculation of
emissions from the flare. However, if the
reporter does not use a continuous gas
composition analyzer, we have
reassessed the current subpart W
requirements that apply and think that
they should be revised to improve
clarity and thus better correspondingly
result in calculated emissions that
accurately reflect CH4 emissions at the
facility. Specifically, existing 40 CFR
98.233(n)(2) requires determination of
‘‘the appropriate gas compositions for
each stream of hydrocarbons going to
the flare . . .’’ However, 40 CFR
98.233(u)(2)(i) for onshore petroleum
and natural gas production facilities and
onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facilities requires
the reporter to use an annual average gas
composition based on the most recent
available analysis of the facility.
Although not explicitly stated, one
interpretation is that the ‘‘most recent
available analysis’’ should be for each
stream of hydrocarbons routed to the
flare. Another interpretation of 40 CFR
98.233(u)(2)(i) is that the composition of
produced gas may be used for all
streams routed to the flare. This
interpretation is based on the first
sentence in existing 40 CFR
98.233(u)(2)(i) that states: ‘‘If you have
a continuous gas composition analyzer
for produced natural gas, you must use
an annual average of these values for
determining the mole fraction.’’ Given
the ambiguity in the existing
regulations, to date the EPA has not sent
validation messages to have all facilities
report using only one of the possible
interpretations. Another concern with
the current procedures for determining
gas composition when not using a
continuous gas composition analyzer is
that there is no requirement to conduct
additional sampling and analysis over
time, and subpart W does not specify
how compositions from multiple
streams are to be weighted to generate
the constituent mole fractions of the
total combined stream into the flare that
are to be used in equations W–19 and
W–20. The current requirements for
determining gas compositions for flared
streams in other industry segments are
clearer. However, one of the options for
transmission compression, underground
natural gas storage, LNG storage, LNG
import/export facilities, and
transmission pipeline industry segments
is to use a default CH4 composition of
95 percent, which may not accurately
represent the composition of the gas
flow routed to flares for some facilities.
The proposed revisions to the flare
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50335
stacks methodology would delete the
cross-reference to 40 CFR 98.233(u)(2)
and specify the gas composition
determination requirements within
proposed 40 CFR 98.233(n)(3). The
proposed options are to use a
continuous gas composition analyzer or
to take samples for compositional
analysis at least once each quarter in
which the flare operated. If a continuous
gas analyzer is used, then the measured
data would be required to be used to
calculate flared emissions. Reporters
would be allowed to determine the
composition of either the inlet gas to the
flare or on each of the streams that are
routed to the flare. If periodic samples
are collected, then the measured
concentrations would be combined with
flow data over the same time periods to
calculate flow-weighted annual average
concentrations.
Fifth, for clarity, we are proposing to
add requirements in existing 40 CFR
98.233(n)(5) to specify how flow and
composition data would be used to
calculate total emissions depending on
different scenarios a reporter could use
to determine the flow and gas
composition. Proposed 40 CFR
98.233(n)(5)(i) specifies that if both flow
and gas composition are determined for
the inlet gas to the flare, then the inlet
gas data would be used in a single
application of equations W–19 and W–
20 to calculate the total emissions from
the flare. If the flow and gas
composition are determined for each of
the streams that are routed to the flare,
then one proposed option in proposed
40 CFR 98.233(n)(5)(iii) would require
the reporter to use each set of streamspecific flow and annual average
concentration data in equations W–19
and W–20 to calculate stream-specific
flared emissions for each stream, and
then sum the results from each streamspecific calculation to calculate the total
emissions from the flare. Alternatively,
in such circumstances proposed 40 CFR
98.233(n)(5)(iii) would also allow
reporters to sum the flows from each
source to calculate the total gas flow
into the flare and use the source-specific
flows and source-specific annual
average concentrations to determine
flow-weighted annual average
concentrations of CO2 and hydrocarbon
constituents in the combined gas stream
into the flare. The calculated total gas
flow and the calculated flow-weighted
annual average concentrations would
then be used in a single application of
both equation W–19 and W–20 to
calculate the total emissions from the
flare. If flow is determined for all of the
individual source streams while gas
composition is determined for the
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50336
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
combined stream into the flare, then
proposed 40 CFR 98.233(n)(5)(ii) would
require the reporter to sum the
individual source flows to calculate the
total flow into the flare. This summed
volume and the gas composition
determined for the stream into the flare
would be used in a single application of
equations W–19 and W–20 to calculate
the total emissions from the flare.
Finally, in 40 CFR 98.233(n)(5)(iv) we
are proposing that a reporter may not
calculate flared emissions based on the
determination of the total volume at the
inlet to the flare and gas composition for
each of the individual streams routed to
the flare. The proposal would not allow
this combination of volume and gas
composition determinations because
there is no way to calculate flowweighted average compositions of either
the inlet gas to the flare or the
individual source streams.
Sixth, we are proposing to delete the
option to use a default higher heating
value (HHV) in the calculation of N2O
emissions and instead require all
reporters to use either a flare-specific
HHV or individual flared gas streamspecific HHVs in the calculation.
Currently, 40 CFR 98.233(n)(7) requires
the use of equation W–40 to calculate
N2O emissions from flares. This
equation requires the flared gas volume,
the HHV of the flared gas, and the use
of a default emission factor. For field gas
or process vent gas, the variable
definition for the HHV provides that
either a site-specific or default value
may be used; for other gas streams, a
site-specific HHV must be used. We are
proposing in 40 CFR 98.233(n)(8) to
require the use of a flare-specific HHV
when composition of the inlet gas to the
flare is measured or when flowweighted concentrations of the inlet gas
are calculated from measured flow and
composition of each of the streams
routed to the flare. Similarly, we are
proposing that reporters would calculate
N2O emissions using flared gas streamspecific HHVs when flow and
composition are determined for each of
the individual streams that are routed to
the flare and emissions are calculated
per stream and summed to calculate
total emissions from the flare. We are
proposing this change because we
believe flare-specific values more
accurately represent the HHV of variable
flared gas composition and would result
in more accurate calculation of N2O
emissions. Our assessment is that the
methods for calculating CO2 and CH4 in
40 CFR 98.233(n) already require the
use of flare-specific concentrations for
the hydrocarbon constituents in the
flared gas streams; therefore, we expect
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
that a flare-specific HHV is known (or
can be calculated using the
compositional data) without incurring
additional burden, while increasing the
accuracy of the emissions estimate. We
are also proposing to add a requirement
in 40 CFR 98.236(n)(9) to report the
HHV(s) used to calculate N2O
emissions. This data element would
improve verification of reported N2O
emissions and minimize the amount of
communication with reporters via eGGRT. It also would be useful for
characterizing the differences in flared
gas streams among the various industry
segments and basins, and it is expected
to be useful in analyses such as updates
to the U.S. GHG Inventory.
Seventh, we are proposing changes to
the emission calculation requirements
for flares that use CEMS in order to
address requirements in CAA section
136(h) as described in section II.B of
this preamble. Currently, if a reporter
operates and maintains a CEMS to
monitor emissions from a flare, existing
40 CFR 98.233(n)(8) requires the
reporter to calculate only CO2 emissions
from the flare. This proposal would
revise existing 40 CFR 98.233(n)(8)
(proposed 40 CFR 98.233(n)(9)) to
require reporters to comply with all of
the other emission calculation
procedures in proposed 40 CFR
98.233(n), with one exception. The
exception is that since CO2 emissions
would be measured with the CEMS,
calculation of CO2 emissions using
equation W–20 would not be required.
We expect that these proposed
amendments would address a potential
gap in CH4 emissions reporting and
improve the overall quality and
completeness of the emissions data
collected by the GHGRP, consistent with
section II.A of this preamble.
Eighth, we are proposing to replace
the current source-specific
methodologies for calculating flared
emissions (e.g., existing 40 CFR
98.233(e)(6) for dehydrators or existing
40 CFR 98.233(g)(4) for completions)
with a requirement (proposed 40 CFR
98.233(n)(10)) that the reporter use
engineering calculations and best
available data to disaggregate the
calculated total emissions per flare to
the source types that routed gas to the
flare. One issue with the current sourcespecific flared emission calculation
methodologies is that the equation
inputs developed under these
methodologies (e.g., flared volumes and
compositions) often differ from the
inputs used in the methodology to
calculate the total emissions from the
flare (as specified in existing 40 CFR
98.233(n)). As a result, when using the
existing methodologies, the sum of the
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
flared emissions calculated for
individual source types sometimes
exceeds the total emissions calculated
using the methodology for calculating
total emissions from the flare. The
proposed change would eliminate this
issue because only the flare
methodology would be used to calculate
emissions from a flare, and only these
values would be included in the
published data set for the reporting year.
Since estimates of the flared emissions
from source types that route emissions
to flares are still useful in other analyses
(e.g., assessing impacts of emission
control regulations on nationwide
emission trends), the proposed
methodology also would require
reporters to estimate the portions of the
total emissions from each flare that are
attributable to each type of source that
is currently subject to flared emissions
reporting (e.g., completions, storage
tanks, associated gas). The expected
accuracy of the estimated quantities per
source type may sometimes be lower
than the expected accuracy of the total
emissions from the flare since the
source-specific estimates would be
based on best available data, which may
be of more variable quality. However,
the expectation is that the sum of the
estimated emissions over all source
types will always equal the calculated
(and reported) total emissions from the
flare, and it is expected that the results
will be of sufficient accuracy for their
intended purpose.
This proposed change would also
address a common misperception
among reporters regarding the flare
activity data that is to be reported under
existing 40 CFR 98.236(n). Many
reporters have provided information
through the GHGRP Help Desk and in
correspondence with the EPA via eGGRT indicating that they believe the
adjustment requirement in existing 40
CFR 98.233(n)(9) applies to all flare
data, not just the mass emissions (as
intended). Thus, some reporters provide
activity data information for a flare only
if some of the mass emissions from the
flare are due to combustion of gas from
source types that are not subject to
source-specific flared emissions
reporting (i.e., miscellaneous flared
sources). Although these reporters
generally correctly report the mass
emissions from the flare that are due to
the miscellaneous flared sources, they
incorrectly limit their activity data
reporting to those same streams. The
EPA has procedures in its verification
process to identify such errors; if errors
are identified, the EPA notifies the
reporter, who can resolve the issue by
correcting the data and resubmitting
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
their annual GHG report. Some reporters
have also indicated that they dislike
reporting activity data for a flare in one
table in the reporting form (i.e., Table
N.1) and reporting the emissions in a
different table; they suggest that it
would be clearer to report all flare
activity data and emissions related to a
particular emission source type together
in one location.
We also expect that the total
emissions per flare calculated using the
proposed methodology described above
would be more accurate than the
emissions calculated using the current
source-specific methodologies. While
similar changes to the methods for
determining flow rate and composition
of the gas routed to the flare could be
proposed for each of the source-specific
methodologies, we have tentatively
determined that the additional accuracy
in the source-specific flared emissions
relative to calculation of disaggregated
total emissions based on best available
data is not needed given the additional
burden that would be imposed, as the
total flared emissions are expected to be
accurate; in other words, applying
source-level methods for flares over the
proposed method would not be
expected to have an impact on the
accuracy of the total emissions
calculated. However, the proposed
approach would still maintain
calculation and reporting of flared
emissions per source type because of
that information’s importance for use in
assessing trends in control over time
and in policy determinations under the
CAA, and it would also be useful in U.S.
GHG Inventory development.
Finally, we are proposing to remove
existing 40 CFR 98.233(n)(9) for
consistency with the other proposed
provisions in this subsection, as the
requirement to correct flare emissions to
avoid double counting would no longer
be necessary because the disaggregated
emissions would not be a separate
source type.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
2. Reporting Requirements for Flared
Emissions
The EPA is proposing several changes
to the reporting requirements for flares.
These changes are being proposed to
align reporting in 40 CFR 98.236(n) with
the proposed revisions to the
calculation methods specified in
proposed 40 CFR 98.233(n), consistent
with section II.B of this preamble, and
to improve the verification process,
obtain a better understanding of the
design and operation of flares in each of
the industry segment to help future
policy determinations, and clarify
ambiguous provisions.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
First, the EPA is proposing to replace
the source-specific flared CH4, CO2, and
N2O emissions reporting requirements
currently in 40 CFR 98.236(e), (g), (h),
(j), (l), (m), and (n) with a requirement
to report source-specific CH4, CO2, and
N2O emissions that have been
disaggregated from the total flare
emissions as described in section III.N.1
of this preamble. The disaggregated
emissions per source type would be
reported per flare under proposed 40
CFR 98.236(n)(19). We are proposing to
remove the source-specific flared CH4,
CO2, and N2O emissions reporting
requirements currently in 40 CFR
98.236(k), but for the reasons discussed
in section III.L of this preamble, we are
not proposing to include condensate
storage tanks in this list of source types
for which emissions would be
disaggregated in proposed 40 CFR
98.236(n)(19). We are also proposing to
include AGR vents in the list of source
types for which emissions would be
disaggregated in proposed 40 CFR
98.236(n)(19), even though emissions
from flaring are not currently reported
separately for that source, due to the
proposed addition of reporting of CH4
emissions from that source type, as
discussed further in section III.F.1 of
this preamble. In addition to aligning
the reporting with the proposed
calculation methodology, reporting the
disaggregated emissions per flare rather
than per facility, sub-basin, or county
(under the current provisions of subpart
W), and rather than per well-pad,
gathering and boosting site, or facility
(as is being proposed for vented
emissions), would provide the EPA and
other stakeholders with a better
understanding of the impact of different
emission source types on the
performance of flares. We are proposing
to retain some of the unit-specific
activity data for source types that are
flared as described throughout this
preamble in the sections that describe
amendments specific to those source
types (e.g., section III.F.2 of this
preamble for AGR vents, sections III.K.6
and III.K.8 of this preamble for
atmospheric storage tanks, section
III.M.1 for associated gas flaring).
Second, the EPA is proposing to add
a requirement for facilities in the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production industry segment, the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting industry
segment, and the Onshore Natural Gas
Processing industry segment to report
an estimate of the fraction of the gas
burned in the flare that is obtained from
other facilities specifically for flaring as
opposed to being generated in on-site
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50337
operations. A finding from the currently
reported data is that a number of
facilities in these industry segments
report significant amounts of emissions
from miscellaneous flared sources. It is
not clear what sources are generating
the large amount of gas that is routed to
these flares. It is important to know
what source types are generating the
large amounts of flared gas because the
same source type may not always be
routing the gas to a flare. If the source
type also is not currently subject to
source-specific reporting of vented
emissions, then a potentially large
quantity of vented emissions might go
unreported. It appears that one potential
source of currently undefined sources of
flared emissions is emissions from one
facility that are routed to another facility
specifically for flaring. To help the EPA
understand what source types are
generating the large amounts of flared
gas, we are proposing in 40 CFR
98.236(n)(10) to require reporting by
facilities in these three industry
segments of an estimate of the fraction
of the gas burned in the flare that is
obtained from other facilities
specifically for flaring as opposed to
being generated in on-site operations.
As an example, if an owner or operator
has an onshore petroleum and natural
gas production and an onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facility in the same basin and
routes associated gas from wells in the
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facility to a flare that is
defined as part of the onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting
facility, then the flared emissions would
be reported by the onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting
facility as emissions from ‘‘other flare
stacks’’ sources under the current rule
(or from other flared sources under the
proposed amendments). If the other gas
streams routed to the flare are from
sources at the onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting
facility, then for this proposed reporting
requirement, the onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting
facility report would include an
estimate of the fraction of the total gas
burned in the flare that is associated gas
from the onshore petroleum and natural
gas production facility. We request
comment on the types of sources (both
onsite sources and offsite sources) that
may be generating these large emissions
and whether other reporting elements
could be specified that would better
achieve the EPA’s objective of clearly
characterizing the sources of flared
emissions from facilities in the three
industry segments identified above. For
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50338
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
example, we have considered adding a
reporting element to identify for each
flare the source type in the category of
‘‘other flared sources’’ under this
proposal that routes the largest quantity
of gas to the flare. We also request
comment on whether there should be a
minimum threshold for the amount of
gas routed from a source in the ‘‘other
flared sources’’ category before reporting
the identity of the source type would be
required and the basis for any such
threshold.
Third, we are proposing adjustments
to several of the existing reporting
elements to align with proposed
changes to the calculation methodology.
For example, existing 40 CFR
98.236(n)(4) requires reporting of the
total volume of gas routed to the flare.
As described in section III.N.1 of this
preamble, we are proposing to add an
option for reporters to monitor volume
of each stream routed to the flare. To
align with this monitoring approach, we
are proposing in 40 CFR 98.236(n)(11) to
require reporting of the volumes for
each of the individual streams if the
reporter elects to monitor the flow rate
of the individual streams rather than the
total. Similarly, existing 40 CFR
98.236(n)(7) and (8) require reporting of
the CH4 and CO2 in the feed gas to the
flare. To align with the proposed option
that would allow determination of gas
composition at all of the source stream
levels as an alternative to determination
of the composition at the flare inlet, as
discussed in section III.N.1 of this
preamble, proposed 40 CFR
98.236(n)(14) and (15) also would
require reporting of the annual CH4 and
CO2 mole fractions for each of the
individual streams routed to the flare if
the reporter elects to monitor
composition of those streams. Existing
40 CFR 98.236(n)(6) requires reporting
of the flare combustion efficiency. To
align with the proposed monitoring
tiers, as discussed in section III.N.1 of
this preamble, proposed 40 CFR
98.236(n)(13) would require reporting of
the default combustion efficiency
associated with applicable monitoring
tier. In addition, if a reporter switches
from one monitoring tier to another and
calculates emissions for part of the year
using the default combustion efficiency
for one tier and calculates emissions for
the rest of the year using the default
combustion efficiency for a different
tier, then proposed 40 CFR
98.236(n)(13) would require reporting of
a flow-weighted average combustion
efficiency for that flare. We are
proposing that flow-weighted average
combustion efficiencies be reported to
one decimal place. These data also
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
would help with verification of the
reported emissions.
Existing 40 CFR 98.236(n)(12)
requires reporting of whether a CEMS
was used to measure CO2 emissions
from the flare. We are proposing to keep
this reporting requirement (in proposed
40 CFR 98.236(n)(20)), but to align with
the proposed calculation procedures
when using CEMS, as described in
section III.N.1 of this preamble, we are
also proposing to specify that the CO2
mole fraction of the gas sent to the flare
should not be reported when using
CEMS because equation W–20 is not
used to calculate CO2 emissions when
using a CEMS.
We are proposing changes to the
continuous flow and gas composition
measurement indicator data elements to
require reporting of specific
measurement methodologies that were
used instead of the current ‘‘yes/no’’
indicators. Currently, existing 40 CFR
98.236(n)(2) requires reporting of
whether the flare stack has a continuous
flow measurement device and existing
40 CFR 98.236(n)(3) requires reporting
of whether the flare stack has a
continuous gas analyzer (these are yes/
no indicators). The proposed 40 CFR
989.236(n)(7) would require reporters to
indicate whether flow is determined
using a continuous flow measurement
device or whether they use a continuous
parameter monitoring system with
engineering calculations. Similarly, the
proposed 40 CFR 98.236(n)(8) would
require reporters to indicate whether gas
composition is measured using a
continuous gas analyzer or by taking
periodic samples.
We are also proposing to add a
reporting element in proposed 40 CFR
98.236(n)(13)(i) for facilities that report
flares using a combustion efficiency of
95 percent to indicate whether the flare
is subject to NSPS OOOOb or a State or
Federal plan in part 62 implementing
EG OOOOc or whether the reporter is
electing to implement flare monitoring
procedures that are specified in NSPS
OOOOb or a State or Federal Plan in
part 62 implementing EG OOOOc. This
information would help the EPA verify
the reported data.
Finally, one objective of the current
flare reporting requirements is to obtain
information on the total number of
flares and their operating
characteristics. We are proposing to
require a few new flare-specific
reporting elements to help us better
understand the state of flaring in the
industry and to improve data quality,
such as an indication of the type of the
flare (e.g., open ground-level flare,
enclosed ground-level flare, open
elevated flare, or enclosed elevated
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
flare) in 40 CFR 98.236(n)(4) and the
type of flare assist (e.g., unassisted, airassisted (with indication of single-,
dual-, or variable-speed fan), steamassisted, or pressure-assisted) in
proposed 40 CFR 98.236(n)(5). These
data would help the EPA assess the
impact of design and operation on
emissions and may be useful in analyses
for potential future policy decisions
related to flares under the CAA. To
harmonize the proposed reporting
requirements with the proposed
requirement to either continuously
monitor or periodically inspect for the
presence of a pilot flame as discussed in
section III.N.1 of this preamble, we are
proposing in proposed 40 CFR
98.236(n)(6) that reporters indicate for
each flare whether they continuously
monitor for the presence of a pilot
flame, conduct periodic visual
inspections, or both. If periodic visual
inspections are conducted, we are
proposing to require reporting of the
count of inspections conducted during
the year and an indication of whether
the flare has a continuous pilot or auto
igniter. For a pilot flame that is
monitored continuously, we are
proposing to require reporting of the
number of times the continuous
monitoring device was out of service or
otherwise inoperable for a period of
more than one week.
3. Definition of Flare Stack Emissions
In response to a verification message
in e-GGRT, one reporter noted that the
existing definition of the term ‘‘flare
stack emissions’’ in 40 CFR 98.238 does
not include CO2 that is in streams
routed to the flare. The term is currently
defined to mean ‘‘CO2 and N2O from
partial combustion of hydrocarbon gas
sent to a flare plus CH4 emissions
resulting from the incomplete
combustion of hydrocarbon gas in
flares.’’ Based on this definition, the
reporter concluded that CO2 in streams
routed to the flare are not to be reported
as flare stack emissions. The current
definition, which was added to the 2010
Final Rule after consideration of
comments on the 2010 re-proposal, does
not clearly convey the EPA’s intent that
the CO2 that enters a flare should be
reported as flare stack emissions. This
intent is evident from the fact that
equation W–20 includes a term for the
inlet gas volume times the CO2 mole
fraction in the inlet gas. Additionally, in
a response to a comment on the 2010 reproposal, the EPA clearly stated that the
total quantity of CO2, including both
combusted CO2 (i.e., CO2 created in the
flare) and uncombusted CO2 (i.e., CO2
that entered and simply passed through
the flare), is to be calculated. Another
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
issue with the current definition is that
it implies N2O emissions only result
from partial combustion of
hydrocarbons in the gas routed to the
flare. This is likely the primary
mechanism for generating N2O
emissions when combusting fuels that
include nitrogen-containing
compounds. However, natural gas and
field gas have negligible amounts of
fuel-bound nitrogen. For combustion of
these fuels, it appears the N2O is
generated primarily from converting
thermal nitrogen oxides (NOX) under
certain operating conditions in the flare.
Consistent with section II.D of this
preamble, in order to eliminate the
unintended inconsistency between the
definition and the intent that CO2 in gas
routed to the flare is to be reported as
emissions from the flare, to clarify the
requirement to calculate and report total
CO2 that leaves the flare, and to clarify
the source of flared N2O emissions, we
are proposing to revise the definition of
the term ‘‘flare stack emissions’’ in 40
CFR 98.238 to mean CO2 in gas routed
to a flare, CO2 from partial combustion
of hydrocarbons in gas routed to a flare,
CH4 resulting from the incomplete
combustion of hydrocarbons in gas
routed to a flare, and N2O resulting from
operation of a flare.
O. Compressors
Compressors are used across the
petroleum and natural gas industry to
raise the pressure of and convey natural
gas or CO2. The two main types of
compressors used in the industry are
centrifugal compressors and
reciprocating compressors. Subpart W
currently requires Onshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Production and
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting facilities to
calculate compressor emissions using
population emission factors per existing
40 CFR 98.233(o)(10) and (p)(10).
Population emission factors are
multiplied by the count of equipment,
in this case compressors of a certain
type, to calculate emissions. For the
Onshore Natural Gas Processing,
Onshore Natural Gas Transmission
Compression, Underground Natural Gas
Storage, LNG Storage, and LNG Import
and Export Equipment industry
segments, subpart W requires facilities
to annually measure the emissions from
the compressor sources applicable to the
mode the compressor is in at the time
of the measurement; facilities also have
the option to continuously measure
emissions from a compressor source per
existing 40 CFR 98.233(o)(2) through (5)
and (p)(2) through (5). The annual
measurements are called ‘‘as found’’
measurements because the compressors
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
are to be measured in the mode in
which they are found when the
measurements are made. The ‘‘as
found’’ measurements are required for
each centrifugal and reciprocating
compressor at least annually, but only
for those compressor emission sources
that have measurement requirements for
the mode in which they are found (i.e.,
the defined ‘‘compressor mode-source
combinations’’), as described in the
following paragraph. If a given
compressor was not measured in notoperating-depressurized-mode during
the ‘‘as found’’ measurements for three
consecutive years, a measurement in
not-operating-depressurized-mode is
currently required to be taken during
the next planned scheduled shutdown
of the compressor, per existing 40 CFR
98.233(o)(1)(i)(C) and (p)(1)(i)(D).
Subpart W at 40 CFR 98.238 currently
defines the following ‘‘compressor
sources’’: wet seal degassing vent (for
centrifugal compressors only); rod
packing emissions (for reciprocating
compressors only); blowdown valve
leakage through the blowdown vent (for
both centrifugal and reciprocating
compressors) and unit isolation valve
leakage through the open blowdown
vent without blind flanges (for both
centrifugal and reciprocating
compressors). Subpart W also currently
defines the following ‘‘compressor
modes’’: operating-mode (for both
centrifugal and reciprocating
compressors), standby-pressurizedmode (for reciprocating compressors
only 93), and not-operatingdepressurized-mode (for both
centrifugal and reciprocating
compressors). Some compressor sources
may only release emissions during
certain compressor modes. Therefore,
subpart W uses the term ‘‘compressor
mode-source combination’’ to refer to
the specific compressor sources that
must be measured based on the mode in
which the compressor is found. For
centrifugal compressors, subpart W
currently requires measurement in the
following compressor mode-source
combinations: wet seal oil degassing
vents in operating-mode, blowdown
valve leakage through the blowdown
vent in operating-mode, and unit
isolation valve leakage through an open
blowdown vent without blind flanges in
not-operating-depressurized-mode. For
reciprocating compressors, subpart W
currently requires measurement in the
following compressor mode-source
combinations: rod packing emissions in
93 Currently, subpart W does not require
measurements for centrifugal compressors in
standby-pressurized-mode and therefore does not
define this mode for centrifugal compressors.
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50339
operating-mode, blowdown valve
leakage through the blowdown vent in
operating-mode, blowdown valve
leakage through the blowdown vent in
standby-pressurized-mode, and unit
isolation valve leakage through an open
blowdown vent without blind flanges in
not-operating-depressurized-mode.
1. Mode-Source Combination
Measurement Requirements
The EPA is proposing several
amendments related to the ‘‘as found’’
measurement requirements to improve
the quality of data collected for
compressors. First, standby-pressurizedmode was not included as a mode for
centrifugal compressors in the existing
subpart W definition of ‘‘compressor
mode’’ and no compressor mode-source
combinations were defined for
centrifugal compressors in standbypressurized-mode. While centrifugal
compressors are seldom in the standbypressurized-mode, there have been
several occasions when reporters have
indicated through the GHGRP Help
Desk that a centrifugal compressor was
in this mode during the ‘‘as found’’
measurement. Therefore, we are
proposing to revise the definition of
compressor mode in 40 CFR 98.238 to
add standby-pressurized-mode to the
defined modes for centrifugal
compressors and require measurement
of volumetric emissions from the wet
seal oil degassing vent or dry seal vent,
as applicable (see discussion in
following paragraph) and the volumetric
emissions from blowdown valve leakage
through the blowdown vent when the
compressor is found in this mode
(proposed 40 CFR 98.233(o)(1)(i)(C)),
consistent with section II.A of this
preamble.
Second, dry seals on centrifugal
compressors were not included in the
existing subpart W definition of
‘‘compressor source’’ and no compressor
mode-source combinations were defined
for dry seals on centrifugal compressors.
While emissions from wet seal oil
degassing vents are expected to be larger
than from dry seals when the dry seal
compressor is well-maintained and
operating normally, dry seals still
contribute to centrifugal compressor
emissions, especially if they are poorly
maintained or there are unforeseen
upset conditions. Additionally, the
measurement crew will already be at the
centrifugal compressor to make the ‘‘as
found’’ measurement for blowdown
valve leakage, so they can also measure
the emissions from the dry seal while
they are onsite. Therefore, to better
characterize the emissions from dry seal
centrifugal compressors, we are
proposing to revise the definition of
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50340
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
compressor source in 40 CFR 98.238 to
add dry seal vents to the defined
compressor sources for centrifugal
compressors and require measurement
of volumetric emissions from the dry
seal vents in both operating-mode and
in standby-pressurized-mode (proposed
40 CFR 98.233(o)(2)(iii)), consistent
with section II.B of this preamble.
Proposed measurement methods for the
dry seal vents are similar to those
provided for reciprocating compressor
rod packing emissions and would
include the use of temporary or
permanent flow meters, calibrated bags,
and high volume samplers. We are
proposing that screening methods may
also be used to determine if a
quantitative measurement is required.
We are proposing to specify that
acoustical screening or measurement
methods would not be applicable to
screening dry seal vents because
emissions from dry seal vents are not a
result of through-valve leakage. These
proposed revisions include a proposed
new reporting requirement in proposed
40 CFR 98.236(o)(1)(x) to report the
number of dry seals on centrifugal
compressors and the reporting of
emission measurements made on the
dry seals.
Third, we are proposing to revise 40
CFR 98.233(p)(1)(i) to require
measurement of rod packing emissions
for reciprocating compressors when
found in the standby-pressurized-mode
because recent studies indicate that rod
packing emissions can occur while the
compressor is in this mode.94 The
inclusion of this compressor modesource combination would more
accurately reflect compressor emissions,
consistent with section II.A of this
preamble. Furthermore, the
measurement crew will already be at the
compressor to make the ‘‘as found’’
measurement for blowdown valve
leakage, so they can also measure the
emissions from the dry seal while they
are onsite, and several reporters already
make these measurements.
Fourth, as noted in section III.O of
this preamble, if a given compressor was
not measured in not-operatingdepressurized-mode during the ‘‘as
found’’ measurements for three
consecutive years, a measurement in
not-operating-depressurized-mode is
currently required to be taken during
the next planned scheduled shutdown
94 Subramanian, R. et al. ‘‘Methane Emissions
from Natural Gas Compressor Stations in the
Transmission and Storage Sector: Measurements
and Comparisons with the EPA Greenhouse Gas
Reporting Program Protocol.’’ Environ. Sci. Technol.
49, 3252–3261. 2015. Available in the docket for
this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
2023–0234.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
of the compressor, per 40 CFR
98.233(o)(1)(i)(C) and (p)(1)(i)(D). This
provision requires reporters to schedule
an extra ‘‘as found’’ measurement to
make this required measurement if the
compressor was not found in this mode
when the regularly scheduled ‘‘as
found’’ measurements were taken. We
are proposing to eliminate this
requirement to conduct a measurement
in not-operating-depressurized-mode at
least once every three years, consistent
with section II.C of this preamble. We
originally included this requirement in
subpart W in order to obtain a sufficient
amount of data for this mode (75 FR
74458, November 30, 2010). However,
based on data collected under subpart
W thus far, many compressors are in
not-operating-depressurized-mode for
30 percent of the time or more, so
facilities would be able to obtain
sufficient number of measurements in
not-operating-depressurized-mode to
calculate an accurate mode-source
specific emission factor without the
additional requirement. As such, the
extra measurements are unnecessary,
and we are proposing to eliminate this
requirement and make the annual ‘‘as
found’’ measurements true ‘‘as found’’
measurements. We are also proposing to
remove the reporting requirement to
indicate if the compressor had a
scheduled depressurized shutdown
during the reporting year (existing 40
CFR 98.236(o)(1)(xiv) and 40 CFR
98.236(p)(1)(xiv)) because that
information is only collected to verify
compliance with the requirement to
conduct a measurement in notoperating-depressurized-mode at least
once every three years.
2. Measurement Methods
The EPA is proposing several
amendments related to the measurement
method requirements to improve the
quality of data collected for
compressors. First, we are proposing to
revise the allowable methods for
measuring wet seal oil degassing vents.
Since the inception of subpart W, the
only method provided in 40 CFR
98.233(o)(2)(ii) for measuring
volumetric flow from wet seal oil
degassing vents has been the use of a
temporary or permanent flow meter.
The limitation in methods allowed for
wet seal oil degassing vents was due to
the expectation that the volumetric
flows may exceed the quantitative limits
of these other methods. In reviewing the
data reported for the wet seal oil
degassing vent, we found that the
measured flow rates using flow meters
are often within the limits of other
measurement methods allowed for other
compressor sources. We also found that
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
many reporters have overlooked the
restriction on the methods allowed for
wet seal oil degassing vents and often
reported using other measurement
methods (e.g., high volume samplers).
We have found that most of these
measured flow rates appear to be within
the capacity limits of a typical high
volume sampler. In the small minority
of cases in which flow rates would be
outside of the capacity limit of the
instrument, facilities can use an
alternate method, consistent with the
requirements for other compressor
source measurements. Consequently, we
concluded that the measurement
methods allowed for wet seal oil
degassing vents could be expanded to
include the use of calibrated bags and
high volume samplers. Therefore, we
are proposing to revise 40 CFR
98.233(o)(2)(ii) to allow the use of
calibrated bags and high volume
samplers. However, we are not
proposing to allow the use of screening
methods because wet seal oil degassing
vents are expected to always have some
natural gas flow. Therefore, we are
proposing to retain and clarify this
unique limitation on the use of
screening methods for wet seal oil
degassing vent measurement methods.
This proposed revision would provide
improved clarity of the wet seal oil
degassing provisions and allow an
additional measurement method that
was determined to be accurate for this
source, consistent with section II.B of
this preamble.
Second, we are proposing to remove
acoustic leak detection from the
screening and measurement methods
allowed for manifolded groups of
compressor sources. As noted in
existing 40 CFR 98.234(a)(5), acoustic
leak detection is applicable only for
through-valve leakage. The acoustic
method can be applied to individual
compressor sources associated with
through-valve leakage (i.e., blowdown
valve leakage or isolation valve leakage),
but it cannot be applied to a vent that
contains a group of manifolded
compressor sources downstream from
the individual valves or other sources
that may be manifolded together. The
inclusion of this method for manifolded
compressor sources was in error and we
are proposing to remove it from 40 CFR
98.233(o)(4)(ii)(D) and (E) and 40 CFR
98.233(p)(4)(ii)(D) and (E) to improve
accuracy of the measurements,
consistent with section II.B of this
preamble.
Third, we are proposing a number of
clarifications to the references to the
allowed measurement methods to
correct errors and improve the clarity of
the rule, consistent with section II.D of
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
this preamble. These proposed revisions
include: revising 40 CFR
98.233(o)(1)(i)(A) and (B) to reference 40
CFR 98.233(o)(2)(i) instead of specific
subparagraphs of that paragraph that
may be construed to limit the methods
allowed for blowdown or isolation valve
leakage measurements; revising 40 CFR
98.233(p)(1)(i)(A), (B) and (C) (as
proposed) to reference 40 CFR
98.233(p)(2)(i) instead of specific
subparagraphs of that paragraph that
may be construed to limit the methods
allowed for blowdown or isolation valve
leakage measurements; revising 40 CFR
98.233(p)(1)(i)(A) and (C) (as proposed)
to reference ‘‘paragraph (p)(2)(ii) or (iii)
of this section as applicable’’ instead of
only ‘‘paragraph (p)(2)(ii)’’ to clarify that
measurement of rod packing emissions
without an open-ended vent line are to
be made according to 40 CFR
98.233(p)(2)(iii); and revising 40 CFR
98.233(p)(2)(ii)(C) and (iii)(A) to clarify
that acoustic leak detection is not an
applicable screening method for rod
packing emissions (not a through-valve
leakage).
3. Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production or Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
As noted in section III.O of this
preamble, subpart W requires onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
and onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facilities to
calculate compressor emissions using
population emission factors. As noted in
the introduction to section II of this
preamble, the EPA recently proposed
NSPS OOOOb and EG OOOOc for
certain oil and natural gas sources. The
proposed standards in NSPS OOOOb
and the proposed presumptive
standards in EG OOOOc include
emission limits for reciprocating
compressors, centrifugal compressors
with wet seals, and centrifugal
compressors with dry seals that would
apply when the compressor is in
operating-mode or standby-pressurizedmode. The proposed standards would
require owners or operators to conduct
volumetric emissions measurements
from each reciprocating compressor rod
packing or centrifugal compressor wet
or dry seal on or before 8,760 hours of
operation from startup or from the
previous measurement. Similar to the
2016 amendments to subpart W specific
to equipment leak surveys (81 FR 4987,
January 29, 2016), the EPA is proposing
to revise the calculation methodology
for compressors at onshore petroleum
and natural gas production and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities in subpart W so that
data derived from centrifugal
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
compressor or reciprocating compressor
monitoring conducted under NSPS
OOOOb or the applicable approved state
plan or applicable Federal plan in 40
CFR part 62 could be used to calculate
emissions for subpart W reporting,
consistent with section II.B of this
preamble. For compressors at onshore
petroleum and natural gas production or
onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facilities not
subject to either NSPS OOOOb or an
applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part
62, we are proposing that reporters
would have the option to calculate
emissions for subpart W reporting using
the same provisions for ‘‘as found’’
measurements as other industry
segments.
Because the proposed standards in
NSPS OOOOb and the proposed
presumptive standards in EG OOOOc
are not the same as the requirements in
subpart W, the EPA is proposing a few
additional requirements under subpart
W for compressors subject to the
proposed standards in NSPS OOOOb or
standards in an applicable approved
state plan or applicable Federal plan
codified in 40 CFR part 62. First,
subpart W requires measurement of
compressor sources that would not be
required to be measured under the
proposed standards in NSPS OOOOb
and the proposed presumptive
standards in EG OOOOc (e.g.,
blowdown valve leakage through the
blowdown vent). The EPA is proposing
that reporters conducting measurements
of compressors under NSPS OOOOb or
the applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part
62 would conduct measurements of any
other compressor sources required to be
measured by subpart W at the same
time. Second, because the time between
measurements under the proposed
standards in NSPS OOOOb and the
proposed presumptive standards in EG
OOOOc may not result in measurements
being taken every reporting year, the
EPA is proposing to specify that
reporters would use equation W–22 or
equation W–27, as applicable, to
calculate emissions from all modesource combinations for any reporting
year in which measurements are not
required. Finally, while we are
proposing to eliminate the requirement
to conduct a measurement in notoperating-depressurized-mode at least
once every 3 years for compressors in
the industry segments for which
reporters are currently required to
conduct ‘‘as found’’ measurements (as
described in section III.O.1 of this
preamble), we note that the proposed
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50341
standards in NSPS OOOOb and the
proposed presumptive standards in EG
OOOOc would only require
measurements to be taken in operatingmode or standby-pressurized-mode. If
no compressor sources are measured in
not-operating-depressurized-mode,
reporters would not have data to
develop reporter emission factors for
that mode-source combination using
equation W–23 and equation W–28.
Therefore, we are proposing in 40 CFR
98.233(o)(10)(i)(B) and 40 CFR
98.233(p)(10)(i)(B) that reporters with
compressors subject to NSPS OOOOb or
the applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part
62 would be required to conduct
additional measurements of
compressors in not-operatingdepressurized-mode such that they can
develop an annual reporter emission
factor for isolation valve leakage in notoperating-depressurized-mode. Based
on an analysis of all reciprocating and
centrifugal compressor measurements
for the other industry segments since
2015, approximately one-third of all
compressor measurements were
performed in not-operatingdepressurized mode. We propose to
maintain that percentage for
reciprocating and centrifugal
compressor measurements in the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production and Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segments. Therefore, we are
proposing to require reporters to
measure emissions in not-operatingdepressurized mode from isolation
valve leakage for at least one-third of the
subject compressors during any 3
consecutive calendar year period. We
are also proposing to require reporters to
provide the total count of compressors
measured in not-operatingdepressurized-mode over the previous 3
calendar years, as well as the total
number of compressors subject to NSPS
OOOOb or the applicable approved state
plan or applicable Federal plan in 40
CFR part 62. We request comment on
other ways to collect sufficient
measurements to calculate a reporter
emission factor for isolation valve
leakage in not-operating-depressurizedmode.
For facilities in the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production
and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting industry
segments that do not conduct
measurements, we are proposing to
clarify the language at 40 CFR
98.233(o)(10) and (p)(10) for
compressors at Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production or Onshore
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50342
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting facilities, consistent with
section II.B of this preamble. The
compressor emission factors for these
industry segments are specific to
uncontrolled wet seal oil degassing
vents on centrifugal compressors and
uncontrolled rod packing emissions for
reciprocating compressors. The
language in 40 CFR 98.233(o) and (p)
clearly indicates that the provisions of
40 CFR 98.233(o)(10) and (p)(10) do not
apply for controlled compressor
sources. However, proposed revisions
are necessary to provide clarity
regarding the compressor sources for
which emissions are required to be
calculated under 40 CFR 98.233(o)(10)
and (p)(10) and reported under 40 CFR
98.236(o)(5) and (p)(5). Specifically, we
are proposing minor revisions to 40 CFR
98.233(o)(10) and the corresponding
reporting requirements in 40 CFR
98.236(o)(5) to clarify that the
compressor count used in equation W–
25 should be the number of centrifugal
compressors with atmospheric (i.e.,
uncontrolled) wet seal oil degassing
vents. Similarly, we are proposing
minor revisions to 40 CFR 98.233(p)(10)
and the corresponding reporting
requirements in 40 CFR 98.236(p)(5) to
clarify that the compressor count used
in equation W–29D should be the
number of reciprocating compressors
with atmospheric (i.e., uncontrolled)
rod packing emissions. We are also
proposing to add requirements to report
the total number of centrifugal
compressors at the facility and the
number of centrifugal compressors that
have wet seals to 40 CFR 98.236(o)(5)
and proposing to add a requirement to
report the total number of reciprocating
compressors at the facility to 40 CFR
98.236(p)(5). These additional data
would provide the EPA with an
improved understanding of the total
number of compressors and the number
of compressors that are controlled (i.e.,
routed to flares, combustion, or vapor
recovery systems) in the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production
and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting industry
segments, consistent with section II.C of
this preamble.
In addition, consistent with section
II.B of this preamble, we are proposing
to amend the CH4 and CO2 population
emission factors in equation W–29D for
reciprocating compressors at onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
and onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facilities. The
current population emission factors
were adopted from the 1996 GRI/EPA
study Methane Emissions from the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
Natural Gas Industry; Volume 8:
Equipment Leaks.95 96 In the time since
the promulgation of the current
population emission factor, Zimmerle et
al. (2019) 97 reported the results of a
nationally representative field
assessment of equipment leak rates from
facilities in the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segment. As part of this
proposed rulemaking, the EPA reviewed
Zimmerle et al. (2019) to evaluate the
potential for revisions to the population
emission factor in equation W–29D. We
found that Zimmerle et al. (2019) uses
a larger and more representative sample
of 412 rod packing vent measurements,
compared to the 40 compressor
measurements available in the 1996
GRI/EPA study. Therefore, we are
proposing a population emission factor
for CH4 based on the average population
emission rate measured by Zimmerle et
al. (2019), with a proposed CO2
population emission factor derived by
applying the ratio of the current CO2
emission factor to the current CH4
emission factor to the CH4 emission
factor obtained from Zimmerle et al.
(2019). For more information regarding
our review of Zimmerle et al. (2019) and
the derivation of the proposed emission
factors, see the subpart W TSD,
available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2023–0234. We request comment
on whether there are other studies or
data sets that provide information that
could be used to further refine the
emission factors for both reciprocating
and centrifugal compressors at onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
and onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facilities,
particularly data sets that include
measurements for all compressor
sources (i.e., rod packing and blowdown
95 The development of the current emission
factors for reciprocating compressors in the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production or
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and
Boosting sectors are described in Compressor
Modes and Thresholds, U.S. EPA, November 2010,
(Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0923–3580),
also available in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
96 Campbell, L., M. Campbell, M. Cowgill, D.
Epperson, M. Hall, M. Harrison, K. Hummell, D.
Myers, T. Shires, B. Stapper, C. Stapper, J. Wessels,
AND H. Williamson. Methane Emissions From the
Natural Gas Industry—Volume 8. Equipment Leaks.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, DC, EPA/600/R–96/080h, also
available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
97 Zimmerle, D., Bennett, K., Vaughn, T., Luck, B.,
Lauderdale, T., Keen, K., Harrison, M., Marchese,
A., Williams, L., & Allen, D. (2019).
Characterization of methane emissions from
gathering compressor stations: final report.
Mountain Scholar. https://doi.org/10.25675/10217/
194544. Available in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
isolation valves for reciprocating
compressors and wet seals, dry seals,
and blowdown isolation valves for
centrifugal compressors).
4. Compressors Routed to Controls
Centrifugal and reciprocating
compressors are the only sources for
which capture for fuel use and thermal
oxidizers currently are specifically
listed as dispositions for emissions that
would otherwise be vented (see 40 CFR
98.233(o) and (p) introductory text). The
EPA’s intent with the provisions is to
differentiate flares, which are
combustion devices that combust waste
gases without energy recovery (per 40
CFR 98.238), from combustion devices
with energy recovery, including for fuel
use. However, some thermal oxidizers
combust waste gases without energy
recovery and therefore may instead meet
the subpart W definition of flare.
Consistent with section II.D of this
preamble, in order to emphasize that the
EPA’s intent is generally to treat
emissions routed to flares and
combustion devices other than flares
consistently, we are proposing to
remove the references to fuel use and to
thermal oxidizers in 40 CFR 98.233(o)
and (p) and 40 CFR 98.236(o) and (p).
Instead, we are proposing to define
‘‘routed to combustion’’ in 40 CFR
98.238 to specify the types of non-flare
combustion equipment for which
reporters would be expected to calculate
emissions. In particular, for the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production,
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting, and Natural
Gas Distribution industry segments,
‘‘routed to combustion’’ would mean the
combustion equipment specified in 40
CFR 98.232(c)(22), (i)(7), and (j)(12),
respectively (i.e., the combustion
equipment for which emissions must be
calculated per 40 CFR 98.233(z)). For all
other industry segments, ‘‘routed to
combustion’’ would mean the stationary
combustion sources subject to subpart
C. The proposed definition of ‘‘routed to
combustion’’ would apply for all
subpart W emission sources for which
that term appears (e.g., natural gas
driven pneumatic pumps).
5. Reporting of Compressor Activity
Data
We are proposing to remove some
data elements that are redundant
between 40 CFR 98.236(o)(1) and (2) for
centrifugal compressors and between 40
CFR 98.236(p)(1) and (2) for
reciprocating compressors. Specifically,
current 40 CFR 98.236(o)(1)(vi) and 40
CFR 98.236(p)(1)(viii) require reporters
to indicate which individual
compressors are part of a manifolded
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
group of compressor sources, and
current 40 CFR 98.236(o)(1)(vii) through
(ix) and 40 CFR 98.236(p)(1)(ix) through
(xi) require reporters to indicate
whether individual compressors have
compressor sources routed to flares,
vapor recovery, or combustion.
However, current 40 CFR
98.236(o)(2)(ii)(A) and 40 CFR
98.236(p)(2)(ii)(A) require the same
information for each compressor leak or
vent rather than by compressor. The
information collected for each leak or
vent is more detailed and is the
information used for emissions
calculations. Therefore, the EPA is
proposing to remove the redundant
reporting requirements in existing 40
CFR 98.236(o)(1)(vi) through (ix) and
existing 40 CFR 98.236(p)(1)(viii)
through (xi), consistent with section II.B
of this preamble.
P. Equipment Leak Surveys
Subpart W reporters are currently
required to quantify emissions from
equipment leaks using the calculation
methods in 40 CFR 98.233(q)
(equipment leak surveys) and/or 40 CFR
98.233(r) (equipment leaks by
population count). The equipment leak
survey method currently uses the count
of leakers detected with one of the
subpart W leak detection methods in 40
CFR 98.234(a), subpart W leaker
emission factors, and operating time to
estimate the emissions from equipment
leaks. The current leaker emission
factors applicable to onshore petroleum
and natural gas production and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities are found in existing
Table W–1E of subpart W. These leaker
emission factors are based on the EPA’s
Protocol for Equipment Leak Emission
Estimates published in 1995 (Docket Id.
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0927–0043),
also available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2023–0234. The leaker emission
factors are provided for components in
gas service, light crude service, and
heavy crude service that are found to be
leaking via several different screening
methods. In addition to being
component- and service-specific,
subpart W currently provides two
different sets of leaker emission factors:
one based on leak rates for leaks
identified by Method 21 (see 40 CFR
part 60, appendix A–7) using a leak
definition of 10,000 ppm and one based
on leak rates for leaks identified by
Method 21 using a leak definition of 500
ppm. Currently, the other leak screening
methods provided in subpart W (OGI,
infrared laser beam illuminated
instrument, and acoustic leak detection
device) use the leaker emission factors
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
based on Method 21 data with a leak
definition of 10,000 ppm.
1. Revisions and Addition of Default
Leaker Emission Factors
In the 2022 Proposed Rule, we
proposed to revise the leaker emission
factors to provide separate leaker factors
for leaks detected using OGI based on
recent study data from Zimmerle et al.
(2020) and Pacsi et al. (2019). For the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production and Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segments, the emission factors
were calculated directly from these
study data. For downstream industry
segments, separate OGI emission factors
were estimated using an ‘‘OGI
enhancement factor,’’ which was
estimated as the ratio between the OGI
emission factors and the Method 21
emission factors for the upstream
industry segments. In this proposed
rulemaking and as described in more
detail later in this section, we are
maintaining our proposal to provide
separate emission factors for leaks
detected using OGI based on recent
study data from Zimmerle et al. (2020)
and Pacsi et al. (2019). In this proposed
rulemaking, we are proposing an update
to the emission factors provided for
downstream segments based on an ‘‘OGI
enhancement factor’’ value that has
been updated since the June 2022
proposal. Additionally, in this
rulemaking we are proposing to use the
Zimmerle et al. (2020) and Pacsi et al.
(2019) study data to provide Method 21
at leak definitions of 500 ppm and
10,000 ppm. We expect these updated
emission factors to provide a more
accurate estimation of emissions
estimated with default leaker emission
factors as they use more recent data and
are from a dataset of a larger size than
the current emission factors.
In the years that have followed the
adoption of the leaker emission factors
into subpart W, there have been
numerous studies regarding emissions
from equipment leaks that provide
measurement data to update the existing
emission factors for leaks detected using
Method 21 at a leak definition of either
10,000 ppm or 500 ppm as well as to
quantify leaker emission factors for OGI
screening methods at onshore petroleum
and natural gas production and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities.98 With respect to the
98 See, e.g., ERG (Eastern Research Group, Inc.)
and Sage (Sage Environmental Consulting, LP). City
of Fort Worth Natural Gas Air Quality Study: Final
Report. July 13, 2011, available at https://
www.fortworthtexas.gov/departments/developmentservices/gaswells/air-quality-study/final; Allen,
D.T., et al. ‘‘Measurements of methane emissions at
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50343
OGI screening method, these studies
have found that OGI identifies fewer yet
larger leaks than the EPA’s Method 21.
Specifically, the average leaker emission
factor determined from OGI leak
detection surveys is often a factor of two
or more larger than leaker emission
factors determined when using Method
21 leak detection surveys. Therefore, the
application of the same leaker emission
factor to leaking components detected
with OGI and Method 21 with a leak
definition of 10,000 ppm, as is currently
done in subpart W, likely understates
the emissions from leakers detected
with OGI.
Based on our review of these studies,
we are proposing to amend the leaker
emission factors in existing Table W–1E
(proposed Table W–2) for onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
and onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facilities to
update the Method 21 emission factors
as well as include separate emission
factors for leakers detected with OGI,
consistent with section II.B of this
preamble. We are proposing to revise
the emission factors using study data
from Zimmerle et al. (2020) and Pacsi et
al. (2019). The Zimmerle et al. (2020)
study contains hundreds of quantified
leaks detected using OGI. The Pacsi et
al. (2019) study also contains hundreds
of equipment leak measurements from
sites that were screened using Method
21 with a leak definition of 10,000 ppm
and 500 ppm as well as OGI. We are
proposing the use of these studies as the
basis for the proposed emission factors
because they included recent
measurements of subpart W-specified
equipment leak components from both
oil and gas production and gathering
and boosting sites in geographically
diverse locations.
As noted above, numerous studies
have found that the average size of the
leaks detected by OGI are larger than
those detected by EPA’s Method 21.
Using the Pacsi et al. study data, we
estimate that the leaks detected by OGI
are 1.63 times larger than leaks detected
by Method 21 at a leak definition of
natural gas production sites in the United States.’’
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
of the United States of America, Vol. 110, no. 44.
pp. 17768–17773, October 29, 2013, available at
https://dept.ceer.utexas.edu/methane/study. Docket
Item No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0831–0006; Pacsi,
A.P., et al. ‘‘Equipment leak detection and
quantification at 67 oil and gas sites in the Western
United States.’’ Elem Sci Anth, 7: 29, available at
https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.368. 2019;
Zimmerle, D., et al. ‘‘Methane Emissions from
Gathering Compressor stations in the U.S.’’
Environmental Science & Technology 2020, 54(12),
7552–7561, available at https://doi.org/10.1021/
acs.est.0c00516. The documents are also available
in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50344
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
10,000 ppm and 2.81 times larger than
leaks detected by Method 21 at a leak
definition of 500 ppm. As noted, the
Pacsi et al. (2019) study provided data
on leaks detected by Method 21 at a leak
definition of 10,000 ppm and 500 ppm
as well as OGI data, however, the
sample size of leaks screened in the
Pacsi et al. (2019) study with Method 21
is smaller than those screened with OGI,
particularly when combining the OGI
data from Pacsi et al. (2019) with the
Zimmerle et al. (2020) data. The
combined OGI dataset from Pacsi et al.
(2019) and Zimmerle et al. (2020)
contains more than 700 measurements
from leaks detected with OGI. Emission
factors using these data are derived for
each combination of well site type (e.g.,
gas or oil) and component type (e.g.,
valve). The more than 700
measurements in the combined OGI
dataset results in an average of 44
measurements for each combination of
well site type (e.g., gas or oil) and
component type (e.g., valve). In contrast,
the Pacsi et al. study has nearly 300
measurements for leaks detected using
Method 21 at a leak definition of 500
ppm and 140 measurements for leaks
detected using Method 21 at a leak
definition of 10,000 ppm, which results
in averages of 21 measurements and 10
measurements for each combination of
site type and component type,
respectively.
For OGI, we are proposing leaker
emission factors that were developed
using the combined data from Pacsi et
al. (2019) and Zimmerle et al. (2020) by
site type (i.e., gas or oil). Equipment
leaks are inherently variable; therefore,
sample size is important when seeking
to derive representative equipment leak
emission factors. Therefore, we are
proposing to use the OGI data and the
ratio between OGI and the Method 21 at
a leak definition of 10,000 ppm and a
leak definition of 500 ppm (i.e., 1.63 and
2.81, respectively) to derive the
proposed emission factors for Method
21 at both leak definitions. This
approach uses the most robust set of
data available (OGI) to derive the
proposed emission factors. The precise
derivation of the proposed emission
factors is discussed in more detail in the
subpart W TSD, available in the docket
for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
At onshore petroleum and natural gas
production and onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities, very few facilities use infrared
laser beam illuminated instruments or
acoustic leak detection devices to
conduct equipment leak surveys and
there are no data available to develop
leaker emission factors specific to these
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
methods. Based on our understanding of
these alternative methods, we expect
that their leak detection thresholds
would be most similar to OGI, so that
the average emissions per leak
identified by these alternative methods
would be similar to the emissions
estimated using the proposed OGI leaker
factors. Therefore, we are proposing
that, if these alternative methods are
used to conduct leak surveys, the
proposed OGI leaker emission factors in
proposed Table W–2 would be used to
quantify the emissions from the leaks
identified using these other monitoring
methods. We are seeking comment on
the performance of infrared laser beam
illuminated instruments and acoustic
leak detection devices including data
that may support a separate detection
method specific emission factor or that
supports the proposal that OGI emission
factors appropriately estimate leakers
detected with these methods.
As described in the introductory
section III.P of this section of this
preamble, currently, equipment leak
emissions quantified with the leaker
method are calculated using the count
of leakers and a default emission factor
from existing Table W–1E that is
specific to the type of component (e.g.,
valve) and the service (i.e., gas or oil).
For onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facilities, subpart
W currently specifies and would
continue to specify that all components
should be considered to be in gas
service consistent with the language in
40 CFR 98.233(q)(2)(iv); thus, the gas
service factors from proposed Table W–
2 should be applied to the count of
equipment leak components consistent
with the leak detection method used.
For onshore petroleum and natural
gas production facilities, we are
proposing to amend 40 CFR
98.233(q)(2)(iii) to state that onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
facilities must use the appropriate
default whole gas leaker emission
factors consistent with the well type
(rather than the component-level service
type), where components associated
with gas wells are considered to be in
gas service and components associated
with oil wells are considered to be in oil
service as listed in proposed Table W–
2 to this subpart. This proposed
amendment is intended to ensure that
the application of the proposed
emission factor using the well site type
rather than component-level service
type is consistent with the derivation of
the emission factor. The emission
factors were derived based on studyreported well site type, accounting for
the idea that a gas well site can have
components in oil service and vice
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
versa, and thus would be required to be
applied by well site type.
As described previously, our analysis
of measurement study data from
onshore production and gathering and
boosting facilities demonstrates that the
OGI screening method finds fewer and
larger leaks than Method 21.
Consequently, the leaker emission
factors derived using measurement data
from the OGI screening method are
larger than those derived using the
measurement data from Method 21
screening method. We expect that the
leaker emission factors for other
industry segments that are based on
measurements of Method 21-identified
leaks may similarly underestimate the
emissions from leaking equipment when
OGI (or other alternative methods
besides Method 21) are used to detect
the leaks. In this proposal, we are
applying the addition of an ‘‘OGI
enhancement factor’’ to the leaker
emission factors for the other subpart W
industry segments, resulting in new
proposed emission factors, to ensure
that facilities estimate the same
equipment leak emissions if they either
(1) identify leaks with Method 21 and
apply the Method 21 derived emission
factors or (2) identify leaks with OGI
and apply the OGI enhancement factor
adjusted emission factors. More
specifically, we are proposing to apply
the ‘‘OGI enhancement’’ factor
identified from measurement study data
in the onshore production and gathering
and boosting industry segments, a value
of 1.63, to the leaker emission factors for
the other subpart W industry segments
as a means to estimate and propose an
OGI emission factor set. In other words,
the ‘‘OGI enhancement factor’’ is based
on the average OGI-identified leak being
1.63 times larger than the average
Method 21-identified leak when using a
leak definition of 10,000 ppm in the
measurement study data. Analogous to
the proposed changes in proposed Table
W–2 for the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production and Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting industry segments, this
results in the proposed addition of
emission factor sets specific to OGI,
infrared laser beam illuminated
instrument, or acoustic leak detection
device screening methods. The
proposed emission factor sets are
included in proposed Tables W–4 and
W–6 for the Onshore Natural Gas
Processing, Onshore Natural Gas
Transmission Compression,
Underground Natural Gas Storage, LNG
Storage, LNG Import and Export
Equipment, and Natural Gas
Distribution industry segments. A
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
detailed description of the proposed
emission factors is provided in the
subpart W TSD, available in the docket
for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
The existing reporting requirements
for the equipment leak emission source
types that are quantified by leaker
method include activity and emissions
data (i.e., count of leakers, annual
average operating time, CO2 emissions
and CH4 emissions) on a per component
basis (e.g., valve, connector), consistent
with the component-level screening
surveys and component-level default
emission factors. In addition to
continuing to collect the existing
activity data, we are seeking comment
on including a requirement to report the
major equipment type (e.g., wellhead,
compressor, dehydrator) at which the
component-level leak is found. The
collection of the major equipment type
associated with leakers could facilitate
future development of major equipmentbased leaker factors and/or be combined
with the population of major equipment
at facilities to facilitate future
development of the major equipment
population emission factors. Since the
leak surveys are ground-level, the major
equipment type is expected to be known
and this additional requirement would
appear to result in minimal increased
burden. We are seeking comment on
whether it is appropriate to require the
reporting of the type of major equipment
type in addition to the component type
and specifically if there are concerns
regarding burden or data collection that
should be considered.
2. Addition of Undetected Leak Factor
for Leaker Emission Estimation Methods
Subpart W currently provides various
screening methods for detecting leaking
components in 40 CFR 98.234(a). Each
method includes a unique instrument
and associated procedure by which
leaks are detected. Variability inherently
exists in each method’s ability to detect
leaks and can be attributed to reasons
associated with the instrument, leak
detection procedures, the operator or
site conditions. For example, some
components may be inaccessible to be
surveyed with handheld devices that
require close proximity to the leak to
detect it (e.g., Method 21 flame
ionization detectors (FID)), while the
same leak could be visualized using an
OGI camera that is less dependent on
proximity to the leak. Operators with
varying levels of training or expertise
deploy the screening devices, resulting
in operator variability. Site-level
conditions such as wind speed can also
impact the detection of leaks. We have
reviewed recent study data from Pacsi et
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
al. (2019) in which multiple leak
detection methods, including OGI and
Method 21, were deployed alongside
one another at the same sites. This study
demonstrates that there are undetected
leaks for each method. Based on the
Pacsi et al. (2019) study data, OGI
observes 80 percent of emissions from
measured leaks, Method 21 at a leak
definition of 10,000 ppm observes 65
percent of emissions from measured
leaks, and Method 21 at leak definition
of 500 ppm observes 79 percent of
emissions from measured leaks. In order
to account for the quantity of emissions
that remain undetected by each
screening method, we are proposing to
provide a method specific adjustment
factor, k, for the calculation methods
used to quantify emissions from
equipment leaks using the leaker
method in 40 CFR 98.233(q). The
proposed addition of a method specific
adjustment factor would be expected to
improve the accuracy of emissions data,
consistent with section II.B of this
preamble. Further detail on the
development of the adjustment factor
for each of these screening methods is
provided in the subpart W TSD,
available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2023–0234.
As noted in section III.P.2 of this
preamble, very few onshore petroleum
and natural gas production and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities use infrared laser
beam illuminated instruments or
acoustic leak detection devices to
conduct equipment leak surveys, so
there are no data available to develop a
method-specific adjustment factor, k, for
these detection methods. Based on our
understanding of these alternative
methods, we expect that their leak
detection thresholds would be most
similar to OGI, so that the average
emissions per leak identified by these
alternative methods would be similar to
the emissions estimated using OGI.
Therefore, we are proposing that, if
these alternative methods are used to
conduct leak surveys, the proposed OGI
adjustment factor, k, would be used in
the calculation to quantify the emissions
from the leaks identified using these
other monitoring methods. We are
seeking comment on the performance of
infrared laser beam illuminated
instruments and acoustic leak detection
devices, including data that may
support a separate detection method
specific adjustment factor, k.
We are proposing the survey methodspecific k value in equation W–30 of 40
CFR 98.233(q)(2) such that the factor
would be applied to the emissions
quantified using either the default or the
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50345
proposed site-specific emission factors,
as discussed in section III.P.4 of this
preamble, to estimate equipment leak
emissions. We are also proposing the
application of the k value to the
emissions quantified using the proposed
direct measurement method discussed
in section III.P.3 of this preamble and in
proposed 40 CFR 98.233(q)(3). The
application of the k factor is intended to
account for undetected emissions such
that the reported emissions represent
the actual site-level total, not limited to
the fraction of detected leaks. We are
seeking comment on the application of
this factor to scale detected leak
emissions. Specifically, we are seeking
additional data that either support the
application of this factor and the
appropriate method-specific value for
this factor or support why the proposed
factor should not be applied to
equipment leak emission estimates.
3. Addition of Method To Quantify
Emissions Using Direct Measurement
As an alternative to the proposed
revised default leaker emission factors,
we are also proposing in 40 CFR
98.233(q)(1) to provide an option
(provided in proposed 40 CFR 98.
233(q)(3)) that would allow reporters to
quantify emissions from equipment leak
components in 40 CFR 98.233(q) by
performing direct measurement of
equipment leaks and calculating
emissions using those measurement
results, consistent with section II.B of
this preamble. The proposed
amendments would provide that
facilities with components subject to 40
CFR 98.233(q) can elect to perform
direct measurement of leaks using one
of the existing subpart W measurement
methods in 40 CFR 98.234(b) through
(d), such as calibrated bagging or a high
volume sampler. To use this proposed
option, all leaks identified during a
‘‘complete leak detection survey’’ must
be quantified; in other words, reporters
could not use leaker emission factors for
some leaks and quantify other leaks
identified during the same leak
detection survey. For the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production
industry segment, proposed 40 CFR
98.233(q)(1) specifies that a complete
leak detection survey would be the
fugitive emissions monitoring of a well
site using a method in 40 CFR 98.234(a)
which is conducted to comply with
NSPS OOOOa, NSPS OOOOb, or the
applicable EPA-approved state plan or
the applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR
part 62 or, if the reporter elected to
conduct the leak detection survey, a
complete survey of all equipment on a
single well-pad. For the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50346
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
and Boosting industry segment,
proposed 40 CFR 98.233(q)(1) specifies
that a complete leak detection survey
would be the fugitive emissions
monitoring of a compressor station
using a method in 40 CFR 98.234(a)
which is conducted to comply with
NSPS OOOOa, NSPS OOOOb, or the
applicable EPA-approved state plan or
the applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR
part 62 or, if the reporter elected to
conduct the leak detection survey, a
complete survey of all equipment at a
‘‘gathering and boosting site’’ (and we
are proposing to define this term in 40
CFR 98.238, as described in section III.D
of this preamble). For downstream
industry segments (e.g., Onshore
Natural Gas Transmission
Compression), a complete leak detection
survey is facility-wide, and therefore,
the election to perform direct
measurement of leaks would also be
facility-wide. In other words, this option
would allow the use of measurement
data directly when all leaks identified
are quantitatively measured.
The proposed amendments rely
specifically on quantitative
measurement methods already provided
in the rule. We are seeking comment on
alternative methods for quantifying
leaks for use for these equipment leak
measurements (and for ‘‘as found’’
compressor measurements) along with
supporting information and data. The
supporting information should include
description of the method, limitations
on the applicability of the method, and
calibration requirements. Supporting
data should include accuracy
assessments (e.g., controlled release
assessments) relative to other
quantitative measurement methods
provided in the rule.
4. Addition of a Method To Develop
Site-Specific Component-Level Leaker
Emission Factors
As noted in section III.P of this
preamble, facilities are currently
required to perform leak surveys to
determine the number of leaking
components. The results of these
surveys (i.e., the count of leakers) are
used with default emission factors to
estimate the quantity of resulting
emissions. As noted in the previous
section, the EPA is proposing an
additional option for facilities to
conduct leak surveys and perform direct
measurement to quantify the emissions
from equipment leak components.
The EPA recognizes that while direct
measurement is the most accurate
method for determining equipment leak
emissions, it may also be time
consuming and costly. In consideration
of both the advantages of and potential
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
burdens associated with direct
measurement, the EPA is also proposing
to provide facilities with a method to
use direct measurement from leak
surveys to develop component level
emission factors based on site-specific
leak measurement data. The site-specific
emission factors would provide
increased accuracy over the use of
default emission factors, consistent with
section II.B of this preamble, while
lessening a portion of the burden of
directly measuring every leak.
We are proposing that facilities that
elect to follow the direct measurement
provisions in proposed 40 CFR
98.233(q)(3)(i) must track the individual
measurements of natural gas flow rate
by specific component type (valve,
connector, etcetera, as applicable for the
industry segment) and leak detection
method. We are proposing three
different bins for the leak detection
methods: Method 21 using a leak
definition of 500 ppm as specified in 40
CFR 98.234(a)(2)(i); Method 21 using a
leak definition of 10,000 ppm as
specified in 40 CFR 98.234(a)(2)(ii); and
OGI and other leak detection methods as
specified in 40 CFR 98.234(a)(1), (3), or
(5). We are proposing that reporters
would have to compile at least 50
individual measurements of natural gas
flow rate for a specific component type
and leak detection method (e.g., gas
service valves detected by OGI) before
they can develop and use the sitespecific emission factors for the
component types at the facility. We are
proposing that these flow rate
measurements would be required to be
converted to standard conditions
following the procedures in 40 CFR
98.233(t). We are proposing that the
volumetric measurements comprised of
at least 50 measured leakers must then
be summed and divided by the total
number of leaks measurements for that
component type and leak detection
method combination. The resulting
value would be an emission factor in
units of standard cubic feet per hourcomponent (scf/hr-component). The
site-specific emission factor is proposed
to be used, when available, to calculate
equipment leak emissions following the
procedures in 40 CFR 98.233(q)(2).
Because some equipment component
types are more prevalent and more
likely to reach 50 leak measurements
than other components, application of
the calculation methodology in 40 CFR
98.233(q)(2) may include a default
leaker factors for some components and
site-specific leaker factors for other
components.
For example, a hypothetical onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
facility has 30 single well-pad sites, at
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
which during a reporting year they
perform complete leak surveys of all
components and direct measurements of
all components found leaking at 20 of
the single well-pad sites and they
perform leak detection surveys only
(i.e., no measurement) at the remaining
10 single well-pad sites. In this
example, during the leak detection
surveys at the 20 sites where
measurements were also performed, the
facility obtained sufficient
measurements from valves (i.e., more
than 50 measurements) to develop a
site-specific emission factor in
accordance with proposed 40 CFR
98.233(q)(4). They did not measure
enough components, however, of any
other type (e.g., connector, open-ended
line, pressure relief valve) to develop
site-specific emission factors for these
components. For this example, under
the proposed provisions the facility
must use the methods in 40 CFR
98.233(q)(1) and (3) to quantify
emissions for that reporting year. The
facility would be required to quantify
emissions from the 20 monitored and
directly measured single well-pad sites
in accordance with proposed 40 CFR
98.233(q)(3). Beginning in the reporting
year the measurements were made, the
facility must develop and apply the sitespecific emission factor for valves to any
valve found leaking which was not
directly measured (i.e., valves at the 10
sites where only leak surveys and no
measurements were performed) rather
than applying the default emission
factor. This facility would quantify
emissions from the 10 single well sites
where no measurement was performed
using the count of components found
leaking and the default leaker emission
factors for all components in accordance
with 40 CFR 98.233(q)(1) except valves,
where the site-specific emission factor
must be used. If in subsequent reporting
years, the facility is required to perform
additional surveys or elects to continue
to survey and perform direct
measurement, the facility will
accumulate additional measurements
which may be of a sufficient number to
develop other component type sitespecific emission factors. We also note
that in accordance with proposed 40
CFR 98.233(q)(4), any additional
measurements of a component for
which a facility has developed a sitespecific emissions factor (e.g., valves in
the described example) would be
required to be used to update the sitespecific emission factor annually.
We are proposing to require the use of
a minimum of 50 measurements to
ensure a statistically representative
dataset. We have found that equipment
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
leak measurements are highly variable
and it is imperative to ensure a robust
sample size. We have performed
statistical analyses with measurements
from compressors and determined that a
minimum of 50 measurements is
required to reduce uncertainty to factor
of 3 of the true value.99 We are seeking
comment on the required number of
measurements by component type and
leak detection method, specifically on
whether the number is or is not
appropriate, whether a different number
is appropriate, and the supporting
rationale.
We are also proposing in 40 CFR
98.236(q) to require that the emissions
be reported at the aggregation of
calculated or measured values for the
combination of component type and
leak detection method. As discussed in
more detail in section III.P.1 of this
preamble, numerous studies have
shown that different leak detection
methods identify different populations
of leaking components; therefore,
consistent with the delineation of the
default emission factors by leak
detection method, site-specific emission
factors are proposed to be delineated in
the same way.
5. Removal of Additional Method 21
Screening Survey for Other Screening
Survey Methods
We are proposing to remove the
additional Method 21 screening when a
survey is conducted using a method
other than Method 21. Currently,
facilities using survey methods other
than Method 21 to detect equipment
leaks may then screen the equipment
identified as leaking using Method 21 to
determine if the leak measures greater
than 10,000 parts per million by volume
(ppmv) (see, e.g., 40 CFR 98.234(a)(1)).
If the Method 21 screening of the
leaking equipment is less than 10,000
ppmv, then reporters may consider that
equipment as not leaking. In the 2016
subpart W revisions, we added a leak
detection methodology at 40 CFR
98.234(a)(6) (proposed 40 CFR
98.234(a)(1)(ii) in this proposal) for
using OGI in accordance with NSPS
OOOOa, which does not include an
option for additional Method 21
screening. As noted in response to
comments on the subpart W proposal
regarding the absence of this optional
additional Method 21 screening when
99 Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: Technical
Support for Leak Detection Methodology Revisions
and Confidentiality Determinations for Petroleum
and Natural Gas Systems Final Rule. November
2016. Docket Item No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2015–0764–
0066; also available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–
0234.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
using OGI in accordance with NSPS
OOOOa, the additional screening of
OGI-identified leaking equipment using
Method 21 requires additional effort
from reporters (81 FR 86500, November
30, 2016). Furthermore, as noted
previously in this section, the average
emissions of leakers identified by OGI
are greater than leaks identified by
Method 21. Directly applying the
number of OGI-identified leaks to the
subpart W leaker emission factor
specific to that survey method would
provide the most accurate estimate of
emissions, while selectively screening
OGI-identified leaks using Method 21 to
reduce the number of reportable leakers
would yield a low bias in the reported
emissions. Additionally, this would be
incongruous with the proposed
application and supporting rationale of
the proposed monitoring methodspecific adjustment factor, k (where the
k value for Method 21 with a leak
definition of 10,000 ppm would need to
be applied) if OGI-identified leaks could
be considered non-leaks based on
subsequent Method 21 monitoring.
Therefore, we are proposing to require
reporters to directly use the leak survey
results for the monitoring method used
to conduct the complete leak survey and
are proposing to eliminate this
additional Method 21 screening
provision. These proposed amendments
are expected to provide more accurate
emissions data, consistent with section
II.B of this preamble.
6. Amendments Related to Oil and
Natural Gas Standards and Emissions
Guidelines in 40 CFR Part 60
As noted in the introduction to
section II. of this preamble, the EPA
recently proposed NSPS OOOOb and
EG OOOOc for certain oil and natural
gas new and existing affected sources,
respectively. Under the proposed
standards in NSPS OOOOb and the
proposed presumptive standards in EG
OOOOc, owners and operators would be
required to implement a fugitive
emissions monitoring and repair
program for the collection of fugitive
emissions components at well site,
centralized production facility and
compressor station affected sources. In
addition, the proposed NSPS OOOOb
and EG OOOOc include a proposed
appendix K to 40 CFR part 60,
specifying an OGI-based method for
detecting leaks and fugitive emissions
from all components that is not
currently provided in subpart W. The
EPA also proposed provisions in NSPS
OOOOb and EG OOOOc for equipment
leak detection and repair at onshore
natural gas processing facilities. Similar
to the 2016 amendments to subpart W
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50347
(81 FR 4987, January 29, 2016), the EPA
is proposing to revise the calculation
methodology for equipment leaks in
subpart W so that data derived from
equipment leak and fugitive emissions
monitoring using one of the methods in
40 CFR 98.234(a) which is conducted
under NSPS OOOOb or the applicable
approved state plan or applicable
Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62 would
be used to calculate emissions,
consistent with section II.B of this
preamble.
First, under these proposed
amendments, facilities with certain
fugitive emissions components at a well
site, centralized production facility or
compressor station subject to NSPS
OOOOb or an applicable approved state
plan or applicable Federal plan in 40
CFR part 62 would use the data derived
from the NSPS OOOOb or applicable 40
CFR part 62 fugitive emissions
requirements along with the subpart W
equipment leak survey calculation
methodology and leaker emission
factors to calculate and report their GHG
emissions to the GHGRP. Specifically,
the proposed amendments would
expand the existing cross-reference to
40 CFR 60.5397a to also include the
analogous requirements in NSPS
OOOOb or 40 CFR part 62. Facilities
with fugitive emissions components not
subject to the standards in the proposed
NSPS OOOOb or addressed by
standards in a state or Federal plan
following finalization of the proposed
EG OOOOc would continue to be able
to elect to calculate subpart W
equipment leak emissions using the leak
survey calculation methodology and
leaker emission factors (as is currently
provided in 40 CFR 98.233(q)).
Therefore, reporters with other fugitive
emission sources at subpart W facilities
not covered by NSPS OOOOb or a state
or Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62 (e.g.,
sources subject to other state regulations
and sources participating in the
Methane Challenge Program or other
voluntarily implemented programs)
would continue to have the opportunity
to voluntarily use the proposed leak
detection methods to calculate and
report their GHG emissions to the
GHGRP. To facilitate this proposed
requirement, we are also proposing to
clarify in proposed 40 CFR
98.233(q)(1)(vi)(B) and (C) that fugitive
emissions monitoring conducted using
one of the methods in 40 CFR 98.234(a)
to comply with NSPS OOOOb or an
applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part
62, respectively, is considered a
‘‘complete leak detection survey,’’ so
that onshore petroleum and natural gas
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50348
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
production and onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities would be able to comply with
the proposed requirement to use NSPS
OOOOb or 40 CFR part 62 fugitive
emission surveys directly for their
subpart W reports. We are also
proposing to move the specification that
fugitive emissions monitoring
conducted to comply with NSPS
OOOOa is considered a ‘‘complete leak
detection survey’’ from existing 40 CFR
98.233(q)(2)(i) to proposed 40 CFR
98.233(q)(1)(vi)(A) so that all the
provisions regarding what constitutes a
‘‘complete leak detection survey’’ are
together. In a corresponding
amendment, we are also proposing to
expand the current reporting
requirement in existing 40 CFR
98.236(q)(1)(iii) (proposed 40 CFR
98.236(q)(1)(iv)) to require reporters to
indicate if any of the surveys of well
sites, centralized production facilities or
compressor stations used in calculating
emissions under 40 CFR 98.233(q) were
conducted to comply with the fugitive
emissions standards in NSPS OOOOb or
an applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part
62.100 We request comment on these
proposed amendments and whether
there are other provisions or reporting
requirements relative to NSPS OOOOb
or EG OOOOc that we should consider
for revisions to requirements under
subpart W.
Second, we are proposing to revise 40
CFR 98.234(a) to clarify and consolidate
the requirements for OGI and Method 21
in 40 CFR 98.234(a)(1) and (2),
respectively. In the 2016 amendments to
subpart W (81 FR 4987, January 29,
2016), the EPA added 40 CFR
98.234(a)(6) and (7) to provide OGI and
Method 21 as specified in NSPS OOOOa
as leak detection survey methods. In
part, structuring the amendment this
way allowed the EPA to provide the
NSPS OOOOa leak detection methods as
allowable methods under subpart W
without affecting the requirements for
facilities and industry segments not
subject to NSPS OOOOa. However, as
the EPA continues to propose additional
standards with slightly different
variations on OGI and Method 21, it
would be unnecessarily convoluted
organizationally to continue to add
100 We are similarly proposing to revise the
existing reporting requirement in subpart W related
to NSPS OOOOa, such that reporters would report
whether any of the surveys of well sites or
compressor stations used in calculating emissions
under 40 CFR 98.233(q) were conducted to comply
with the fugitive emissions standards in NSPS
OOOOa (rather than simply reporting whether the
facility has well sites or compressor stations subject
to the fugitive emissions standards in NSPS
OOOOa).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
those methods and cross-references to
each standard to the end of 40 CFR
98.234(a). Therefore, the EPA is
proposing to move 40 CFR 98.234(a)(1)
and 40 CFR 98.234(a)(6) to 40 CFR
98.234(a)(1)(i) and 40 CFR
98.234(a)(1)(ii), respectively, which
would consolidate the OGI-based
methods in 40 CFR 98.234(a)(1).
Similarly, the EPA is proposing to revise
40 CFR 98.234(a)(2) such that 40 CFR
98.234(a)(2)(i) is Method 21 with a leak
definition of 10,000 ppm and 40 CFR
98.234(a)(2)(ii) is Method 21 with a leak
definition of 500 ppm. This proposed
amendment would effectively move 40
CFR 98.234(a)(7) to 40 CFR
98.234(a)(2)(ii). We are also proposing
that the references to ‘‘components
listed in § 98.232’’ would be replaced
with a more specific reference to 40 CFR
98.233(q)(1). The references to specific
provisions in 40 CFR 60.5397a in 40
CFR 98.234(a)(6) and (7) would be
moved to 40 CFR 98.234(a)(1)(ii) and 40
CFR 98.234(a)(2), as applicable.
In December 2022, the EPA proposed
in NSPS OOOOb and EG OOOOc that
owners and operators of natural gas
processing facilities would detect leaks
using an OGI-based monitoring method
following the concurrently proposed
appendix K to 40 CFR part 60. We are
proposing to include that same method
in subpart W at 40 CFR 98.234(a)(1)(iii)
to ensure that reporters of those
facilities would be able to comply with
the proposed subpart W requirement to
use data derived from the NSPS OOOOb
or 40 CFR part 62 fugitive emissions
requirements for purposes of calculating
emissions from equipment leaks. In
addition, as part of the December 2022
proposal of NSPS OOOOb and EG
OOOOc, the EPA proposed an
alternative screening approach for
fugitive emissions from well sites,
centralized production facilities and
compressor stations that would allow
the use of advanced measurement
technologies to detect large equipment
leaks. Under the NSPS OOOOb and EG
OOOOc proposal, if emissions are
detected using one of these advanced
technologies, facilities would be
required to conduct monitoring using
OGI or Method 21 to identify and repair
specific leaking equipment.
Additionally, under the NSPS OOOOb
and EG OOOOc proposal, even if no
emissions are identified during a
screening survey, some facilities using
these advanced technologies would still
be required to conduct annual fugitive
emissions monitoring using OGI. The
EPA’s intent in this proposed rule for
subpart W is that the results of those
NSPS OOOOb and 40 CFR part 62 OGI
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
or Method 21 surveys would be used for
purposes of calculating emissions for
subpart W, as OGI and Method 21 are
capable of identifying leaks from
individual components and they are
leak detection methods provided in
subpart W. The EPA also requests
comment on additional methods or
advanced technologies that can identify
individual leaking components. Based
on the information received, the EPA
would need to review the specific
method and leak detection data
collected using that method to
determine what default leaker emission
factors would apply for that method and
whether any adjustments might be
needed to the subpart W equipment leak
survey calculation methodology when
using that method. Following that
review, the EPA may undertake a future
rulemaking process to include the
additional leak detection method(s) in
40 CFR 98.234(a).
Third, we are proposing subpart W
requirements for onshore natural gas
processing facilities consistent with
certain requirements for equipment
leaks in the proposed NSPS OOOOb or
EG OOOOc. Currently, onshore natural
gas processing facilities must conduct at
least one complete survey of all the
components listed in 40 CFR
98.232(d)(7) each year, and each
complete survey must be considered
when calculating emissions according to
40 CFR 98.233(q)(2). Under the
equipment leak detection and repair
program included in proposed NSPS
OOOOb and the EG OOOOc
presumptive standards, different
component types may be monitored on
different frequencies, so all equipment
at the facility is not always monitored
at the same time. According to the
current requirements in 40 CFR
98.233(q), surveys that do not include
all of the applicable equipment at the
facility are not considered complete
surveys and are not used for purposes
of calculating emissions. Therefore, we
are proposing in 40 CFR
98.233(q)(1)(vi)(F) that onshore natural
gas processing facilities subject to NSPS
OOOOb or an applicable approved state
plan or the applicable Federal plan in
40 CFR part 62 would use the data
derived from each equipment leak
survey conducted as required by NSPS
OOOOb or the relevant subpart of 40
CFR part 62 along with the subpart W
equipment leak survey calculation
methodology and leaker emission
factors to calculate and report GHG
emissions to the GHGRP, even if a
survey required for compliance with
NSPS OOOOb or 40 CFR part 62 does
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
not include all the component types
listed in 40 CFR 98.232(d)(7).
Under this proposed amendment,
reporters would still have to meet the
subpart W requirement to conduct at
least one complete survey of all
applicable equipment at the facility per
year, so if there were components listed
in 40 CFR 98.232(d)(7) not included in
any NSPS OOOOb or 40 CFR part 62required surveys conducted during the
year (e.g., connectors that are monitored
only once every 4 years), reporters
subject to NSPS OOOOb or 40 CFR part
62 would need to either add those
components to one of their required
surveys, making that a complete survey
for purposes of subpart W, or conduct
a separate complete survey for purposes
of subpart W. We expect that reporters
with onshore natural gas processing
plants implementing traditional leak
detection and repair programs are
already making similar decisions
regarding how to meet the requirement
to conduct a complete survey for
subpart W, and our intention with this
proposed amendment is not to change
those decisions. Rather, this amendment
would specify that surveys conducted
pursuant to NSPS OOOOb or 40 CFR
part 62 that do not include all
component types listed in 40 CFR
98.232(d)(7) would be used for
calculating emissions along with each
complete survey.
We are also proposing to add leaker
emission factors for all survey methods
for ‘‘other’’ components that would be
required to be monitored under NSPS
OOOOb or an approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part
62 or that reporters elect to survey that
are not currently included in subpart W.
These proposed THC leaker emission
factors for the ‘‘other’’ component type
are of the same value as the THC leaker
emission factors for the ‘‘other’’
component type for the Onshore Natural
Gas Transmission Compression and the
Underground Natural Gas Storage
industry segments (existing Table W–3A
and Table W–4A, respectively, proposed
Table W–4). For more information on
the derivation of the original emission
factors, see the 2010 subpart W TSD,101
and for more information on the
derivation of the ‘‘other’’ component
type emission factor proposed to be
applied to these types of leaks at
facilities in the Onshore Natural Gas
Processing industry segment, see the
TSD for the 2016 amendments to
101 Greenhouse
Gas Emissions Reporting from the
Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems Industry:
Background Technical Support. November 2010.
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0923–3610;
also available in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
50349
subpart W.102 In a corresponding
amendment, we are also proposing to
expand the reporting requirement in
existing 40 CFR 98.236(q)(1)(iii)
(proposed 40 CFR 98.236(q)(1)(iv)) to
require onshore natural gas processing
reporters to indicate if any of the
surveys used in calculating emissions
under 40 CFR 98.233(q) were conducted
to comply with the equipment leak
standards in NSPS OOOOb or an
applicable approved state plan or the
applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part
62. We request comment on the
proposed amendments to subpart W for
onshore natural gas processing facilities
subject to the equipment leak provisions
of NSPS OOOOb or 40 CFR part 62, as
well as whether there are other
provisions or reporting requirements for
these facilities that we should consider.
Finally, in our review of subpart W
equipment leak requirements for
onshore natural gas processing facilities,
we found that the leak definition for the
Method 21-based requirements for
processing plants in NSPS OOOOa (as
well as proposed NSPS OOOOb and EG
OOOOc presumptive standards) is not
consistent with the leak definition in
the Method 21 option in current 40 CFR
98.234(a)(2), which is the only Method
21-based method available to onshore
natural gas processing facilities under
subpart W. Based on this review, and to
complement the proposed addition of
default leaker emission factors for
survey methods other than Method 21
(as described previously in this
preamble), we are proposing several
additions to the equipment leak survey
requirements for the Onshore Natural
Gas Processing industry segment,
beyond those amendments already
described related to the proposed NSPS
OOOOb and EG OOOOc presumptive
standards. First, we are proposing
default leaker emission factors for
Method 21 at a leak definition of 500
ppm in proposed Table W–4. As with
the proposed ‘‘other’’ component type
leaker emission factors, these proposed
leaker emission factors (i.e., valve,
connector, open-ended line, pressure
relief valve and meter) are of the same
value as the THC leaker emission factors
for the Onshore Natural Gas
Transmission Compression and the
Underground Natural Gas Storage
industry segments (existing Table W–3A
and Table W–4A, respectively). For
more information on the derivation of
those emission factors, see the TSD for
the 2016 amendments to subpart W.103
In addition, we are proposing to add 40
CFR 98.233(q)(1)(v) to indicate that
onshore natural gas processing facilities
not subject to NSPS OOOOb or an
approved state plan or the applicable
Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62 may use
any method specified in 40 CFR
98.234(a), including Method 21 with a
leak definition of 500 ppm and OGI
following the provisions of appendix K
to 40 CFR part 60. This proposed
amendment would ensure that
equipment leak surveys conducted
using any of the approved methods in
subpart W would be available for
purposes of calculating emissions, not
just those surveys conducted using one
of the methods currently provided in 40
CFR 98.234(a)(1) through (5).
102 Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: Technical
Support for Leak Detection Methodology Revisions
and Confidentiality Determinations for Petroleum
and Natural Gas Systems. November 1, 2016.
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2015–0764–0066;
also available in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
103 Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: Technical
Support for Leak Detection Methodology Revisions
and Confidentiality Determinations for Petroleum
and Natural Gas Systems. November 1, 2016.
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2015–0764–0066;
also available in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
7. Exemption for Components in
Vacuum Service
Through correspondence with the
EPA via e-GGRT, some reporters have
stated that certain equipment leak
components at their facility are in
vacuum service. These reporters
indicated that there are no fugitive
emissions expected from components in
vacuum service. After consideration of
these comments and in order to be
consistent with other EPA equipment
leak regulatory programs (e.g., 40 CFR
part 60, subpart VVa), we have
determined that we agree with
commenters. Therefore, we are
proposing an exemption in the
introductory paragraphs of 40 CFR
98.233(q) and (r) for leak components in
vacuum service from the requirement to
estimate and report emissions from
these components. We are also
proposing a definition in 40 CFR 98.238
for the term ‘‘in vacuum service.’’ We
are proposing to require the reporting of
the count of equipment in vacuum
service to enable verification of the
reported data (i.e., ability to confirm that
all equipment for which emissions are
expected has been accounted for and an
indication that other equipment has
been confirmed to meet the proposed
definition of ‘‘in vacuum service’’).
Q. Equipment Leaks by Population
Count
As noted in section III.P of this
preamble, subpart W reporters are
currently required to quantify emissions
from equipment leaks using the
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50350
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
calculation methods in 40 CFR
98.233(q) (equipment leak surveys) and/
or 40 CFR 98.233(r) (equipment leaks by
population count), depending upon the
industry segment. The equipment leaks
by population count method uses the
count of equipment components,
subpart W emission factors (e.g.,
existing Table W–1A for the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production
industry segment), and operating time to
estimate emissions from equipment
leaks. For the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production and Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting industry segments, the
count of equipment components
currently may be determined by
counting each component individually
for each facility (Component Count
Method 2) or the count of equipment
components may be estimated using the
count of major equipment and subpart
W default average component counts for
major equipment (Component Count
Method 1) in existing Tables W–1B and
W–1C, as applicable. Reporters in other
industry segments currently must count
each applicable component at the
facility. We are proposing several
amendments to the calculation
methodology provisions of 40 CFR
98.233(r) and the reporting requirements
in 40 CFR 98.236(r) to improve the
quality of the data collected, consistent
with sections II.B and II.C of this
preamble.
1. Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production and Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
Population Count Method
The current population emission
factors for the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production and Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting industry segments are
found in existing Table W–1A of
subpart W. The gas service population
emission factors are based on the 1996
GRI/EPA study Methane Emissions from
the Natural Gas Industry, Volume 8:
Equipment Leaks (available in the
docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id.
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234). The oil
service population emission factors are
based on the American Petroleum
Institute’s (API) Emission Factors for Oil
and Gas Production Operations,
Publication 4615, published in 1995.
As noted previously in this section,
when estimating emissions using the
population count method, onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
facilities and onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities currently have the option to
use actual component counts (i.e.,
Component Count Method 2) or to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
estimate their component counts using
the count of major equipment (e.g.,
wellhead) and default component
counts per major equipment (e.g., valves
per wellhead) included in existing
Tables W–1B and W–1C of subpart W
(i.e., Component Count Method 1). In
reviewing subpart W data, we find that
the vast majority (greater than 95
percent) of onshore production and
natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities use Component Count Method
1 to estimate the count of components.
It is important to note that both the
population count emission factors and
the default component counts per major
equipment currently included in Tables
W–1A, W–1B and W–1C are servicespecific (i.e., gas or oil) as well as
region-specific (i.e., eastern or western
U.S.). The regional designations are
provided by U.S. state in existing Table
W–1D of subpart W such that a facility
would determine the facility’s region
and select the appropriate region- and
service-specific factors.
In the years that have followed the
adoption of these emission factors into
subpart W, there have been numerous
studies regarding emissions from
equipment leaks at onshore production
and gathering and boosting facilities.
Two recent field studies, Pacsi et al.
(2019) 104 and Zimmerle et al. (2020),105
have performed an equipment and
component inventory alongside
equipment leak screening and
measurement results. Another recent
study, Rutherford et al. (2021),106
included synthesis and analysis of
measurements from component-level
field studies. These studies’ data allow
development of study-estimated
population emission factors as well as
study-estimated default component
counts per major equipment and
comparison of them to those in subpart
W. Comparison of the study-estimated
default component counts per major
equipment found that the subpart W
values underestimate the count of
104 Pacsi, A.P. et al. Equipment leak detection and
quantification at 67 oil and gas sites in the Western
United States. Elementa (2019). https://doi.org/
10.1525/elementa.368. Available in the docket for
this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
2023–0234.
105 Zimmerle, D., et al. Methane Emissions from
Gathering Compressor Stations in the U.S.
Environmental Science & Technology 54 (12), 7552–
7561 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.
0c00516. Available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–
0234.
106 Rutherford, J.S., Sherwin, E.D., Ravikumar,
A.P. et al. Closing the methane gap in US oil and
natural gas production inventories. Nat Commun
12, 4715 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467021-25017-4. Available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–
0234.
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
components found on major equipment
in the field (Zimmerle et al., 2020; Pacsi
et al., 2019). Regarding a comparison of
the population emission factors and
component counts per major equipment
between the subpart W eastern and
western values, Zimmerle et al. (2020)
was the only field study to include both
eastern and western facilities, and the
study values showed ‘‘no statistically
significant differences between eastern
and western U.S. regions.’’ Rutherford et
al. (2021) also found their studyestimated population emission factors to
be higher than those in subpart W,
noting that one of the contributing
factors to this difference was the use of
the eastern factors in subpart W, which
appear to significantly undercount
emissions. Rutherford et al. (2021)
noted that the impact of the use of the
eastern factors has grown over time as
the production in the eastern region of
the U.S. has increased from less than 5
percent of gas produced to nearly 30
percent of the gas produced.
In the 2022 Proposed Rule, we
proposed to revise the current
population emission factors to use major
equipment-based emission factors
developed using a combination of data
from Zimmerle et al., 2020 and Pacsi et
al., 2019. As described in more detail
below, consistent with the 2022
Proposed Rule, we are again proposing
revised emission factors on a per major
equipment basis rather than on a per
component basis. However, in this
proposed rulemaking, we are proposing
to use the data from Rutherford et al.
(2021), which is comprised of several
published studies including Pacsi et al.
2019, to inform the emission factor
values. As described in more detail
below, the Rutherford et al. (2021) study
represents the largest dataset set
available and thus, more accurately
accounts for the variability observed in
equipment leak measurement data in
terms of the size and frequency of leaks.
Based on our review of these studies,
our assessment is that they support
revision of the population count method
and corresponding emission factors for
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production and onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities and we are proposing to amend
this population count method and
corresponding emission factors after
consideration of these more recent study
data, consistent with section II.B of this
preamble. These proposed amendments
include new population emission
factors that are on a per major
equipment basis rather than a per
component basis. As mentioned
previously, the vast majority of reporters
estimate the component counts using
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
Component Count Method 1. By
providing emission factors on a major
equipment basis instead of by
component, we would eliminate the
step to estimate the number of
components. All facilities would be able
to count the actual number of major
equipment and consistently apply the
same emission factor to calculate
emissions. This would reduce reporter
burden and reduce the number of errors
in the calculation of emissions, as we
find that numerous facilities incorrectly
estimate the number of components
using Component Count Method 1
while providing consistently estimated
emission results.
In comparing the recent study data for
this proposal, our assessment is that the
Rutherford et al. (2021) study represents
the most robust sample size of
approximately 3,700 measurements for
developing population emission factors
by major equipment. The larger sample
size is likely more representative of
varying degrees of leak detection and
repair programs (i.e., not only facilities
conducting frequent surveys), which
can impact the number of leaks found
during surveys (i.e., if more frequent
surveys are being conducted and leaks
are being repaired in a timely manner,
then each survey likely finds less leaks).
The Rutherford et al. (2021) study also
employs a bootstrap resampling
statistical approach 107 that allows for
the inclusion of infrequent large
emitters (i.e., ‘‘super-emitters’’) in the
development of the emission factors,
improving the representation of the
inherent variability of equipment leaks
in the developed emission factors.
Therefore, we are proposing major
equipment emission factors developed
using Rutherford et al. (2021) to provide
population emission factors by major
equipment and site type (i.e., natural gas
system or petroleum system). The
proposed emission factors were taken
from Supplementary Tables 3 and 4 of
Rutherford et al. (2021). The average
emission factors presented in these
study tables were converted from units
of kilograms per day to standard cubic
feet of whole gas per hour for
cumulative equipment component leaks
from different types of major equipment
including wellheads, separator, heater,
meter including headers, compressor,
dehydrator and tanks. The major
equipment indicating venting emissions
(e.g., tanks—unintentional vents) or
emissions from other sources also
covered by subpart W (e.g., liquids
unloading, flaring, pumps) are not
107 Bootstrapping is a type of resampling where a
known dataset is repeatedly drawn from, with
replacement, to generate a sample distribution.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
included in the proposed equipment
leak population emission factors.
Specific to meters/piping and consistent
with current requirements related to
meters/piping at existing 40 CFR
98.233(r)(2)(i)(A), we are proposing in
40 CFR 98.233(r)(2) to specify that one
meters/piping equipment should be
included per well-pad for onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
operations and the count of meters in
the facility should be used for this
equipment category at onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities. As a consequence of
the broader scope of equipment
surveyed in the study data that inform
Rutherford et al. (2021), the proposed
emission factors in proposed Table W–
1 include more pieces of major
equipment than are currently included
in Table W–1B and W–1C of subpart W.
A complete description of the derivation
of the proposed emission factors is
discussed in more detail in the subpart
W TSD, available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2023–0234. The proposed major
equipment emission factors would
replace the current component-based
emission factors in the existing Table
W–1A. We are also proposing to remove
Tables W–1B, W–1C, and W–1D since
they would no longer be needed for the
population count method for these
industry segments. We are proposing
amendments to the reporting
requirements for the use of the
population count method to align with
the reporting of major equipment counts
consistent with the proposed emission
factors in 40 CFR 98.236(r). We are
seeking comment on the development of
population count emission factors based
on major equipment. We are also
seeking comment on the proposed use
of the Rutherford et al. (2021) study data
instead of using study data from
Zimmerle et al. (2020) and/or Pacsi et
al. (2019) to provide the population
count emission factors by major
equipment, and the rationale supporting
the use of the respective study data.
2. Natural Gas Distribution Emission
Factors
Natural gas distribution companies
currently quantify the emissions from
equipment leaks from pipeline mains
and services, below grade transmission
distribution transfer stations, and below
grade metering-regulating stations
following the procedures in 40 CFR
98.233(r). This method uses the count of
equipment, subpart W population
emission factors in existing Table W–7
(proposed Table W–5 in this proposal),
and operating time to estimate
emissions. The population emission
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50351
factors for distribution mains and
services in existing Table W–7
(proposed Table W–5) are based on
information from the 1996 GRI/EPA
study.108 Specifically for plastic mains,
additional data are sourced from a 2005
ICF analysis.109 The population
emission factors for distribution mains
are published per mile of main by
pipeline material and emission factors
for distribution services are published
per service by pipeline material. The
population emission factors for below
grade stations in existing Table W–7
(proposed Table W–5) are based on
information from the 1996 GRI/EPA
study.110 The population emission
factors for below grade transmissiondistribution transfer stations and below
grade metering-regulating stations are
currently specified in the existing Table
W–7 per station by three inlet pressure
categories (≤300 pounds per square inch
gauge (psig), 100–300 psig, < 100 psig).
In this rulemaking, the EPA is
proposing to update the population
emission factors in existing Table W–7
(proposed Table W–5) to subpart W
using the results of studies and
information that were not available
when the rule was finalized in 2010.
Notably, the EPA reviewed recent
studies and updated the emission
factors for several natural gas
distribution sources, including pipeline
mains and services and below grade
stations, for the 2016 U.S. GHG
Inventory.111 The majority of the U.S.
GHG Inventory updates were based on
108 GRI/EPA. Methane Emissions from the Natural
Gas Industry, Volume 9: Underground Pipelines.
Prepared for Gas Research Institute and U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency National Risk
Management Research Laboratory by L.M.
Campbell, M.V. Campbell, and D.L. Epperson,
Radian International LLC. GRI–94/0257.2b, EPA–
600/R–96–080i. June 1996. Available in the docket
for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
2023–0234.
109 ICF. Fugitive Emissions from Plastic Pipe,
Memorandum from H. Mallya and Z. Schaffer, ICF
Consulting to L. Hanle and E. Scheehle, EPA. June
30, 2005. Available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–
0234.
110 GRI/EPA. Methane Emissions from the Natural
Gas Industry, Volume 10: Metering and Pressure
Regulating Stations in Natural Gas Transmission
and Distribution. Prepared for Gas Research
Institute and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
National Risk Management Research Laboratory by
L.M. Campbell and B.E. Stapper, Radian
International LLC. GRI–94/0257.27, EPA–600/R–
96–080j. June 1996. Available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–
0234.
111 U.S. EPA. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas
Emissions and Sinks 1990–2014: Revisions to
Natural Gas Distribution Emissions. April 2016.
Available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/
files/2016-08/documents/final_revision_ng_
distribution_emissions_2016-04-14.pdf and in the
docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50352
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
data published by Lamb et al. in
2015.112 Since the time that the 2016
U.S. GHG Inventory updates were made,
additional studies for pipeline
distribution mains have been published
and reviewed by the EPA, notably
Weller et al. in 2020.113 Our assessment
of the studies published since subpart
W was finalized supports revising the
emission factors for pipelines in the
Natural Gas Distribution industry
segment of subpart W.
The population emission factors for
distribution mains and services are a
function of the average measured leak
rate (in standard cubic feet per hour)
and the frequency of annual leaks
observed (leaks/mile-year or leaks/
service-year) by pipeline material (e.g.,
protected steel, plastic). The Lamb et al.
and Weller et al. studies utilized
different approaches for quantifying
leak rates and determining the pipeline
material-specific frequency of annual
leaks. The Lamb et al. study quantified
leaks from distribution mains and
services using a high volume sampling
method and some downwind tracer
measurements and estimated the
frequency of leaks by pipeline material
using company records and Department
of Transportation (DOT) repaired leak
records from six local distribution
companies (LDCs). This methodology
was consistent with the 1996 GRI/EPA
study. The Weller et al. study quantified
leaks from only distribution mains using
the AMLD technique, which involves
mobile surveying using high sensitivity
instruments and algorithms that predict
the leak location and size, attributed
leaks to the pipeline material using
geographic information system (GIS)
data, and estimated the frequency of
leaks using modeling.
In the 2022 Proposed Rule, we
proposed to revise the pipeline main
equipment leak emission factors using a
combination of data from Lamb et al.
(2015) and Weller et al. (2020). We
sought comment on the approach of
combining data from these two studies.
We received numerous comments
regarding the classification of pipeline
materials and respective quantified
leaks in the Weller et al. (2020) study.
In response to these comments and as
112 Lamb, B.K. et al. ‘‘Direct Measurements Show
Decreasing Methane Emissions from Natural Gas
Local Distribution Systems in the United States.’’
Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 5161–5169.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
113 Weller, Z.D.; Hamburg, S.P.; and Von Fischer,
J.C. 2020. ‘‘A National Estimate of Methane Leakage
from Pipeline Mains in Natural Gas Local
Distribution Systems.’’ Environ. Sci. Technol. 2020,
54(1), 8958. Available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–
0234.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
discussed in more detail below, we
agree with commenters that the
categorization of pipeline leaks by
material type likely resulted in
inaccuracies specifically for the
unprotected and protected steel pipeline
material types. In this rulemaking, we
are continuing to propose revisions of
the equipment leak pipeline main
emission factors using more recent
study data, but instead of combining
data from Lamb et al. (2015) and Weller
et al. (2020), we are proposing to rely
only on the Lamb et al. (2015) study.
In subpart W, there are currently four
categories of pipeline mains:
unprotected steel, protected steel,
plastic, and cast iron. The steel
categories are differentiated by the
presence of cathodic protection, and, as
evidenced by the 1996 GRI/EPA study
and Lamb et al. study data, unprotected
steel pipelines are considered to be
more leak prone than cathodically
protected steel pipelines. In the Weller
et al. study, the categories of pipeline
mains include bare (unprotected) steel,
coated (protected) steel, cast iron, and
plastic. We note that steel pipelines can
be protected by cathodic protection and/
or coating, and in the Weller et al.
study, cathodically unprotected yet
coated steel pipeline mains appear to
have been grouped with cathodically
protected steel pipeline mains. Using
the unprotected and protected steel
classifications in the Weller et al. study
would thus result in emission factors for
protected steel that are higher than for
unprotected steel, which would conflict
with other study data (e.g., 1996 GRI/
EPA, Lamb et al.) as well as voluntary
emissions reductions programs (e.g.,
EPA Natural Gas STAR). The pipeline
categories in the Weller et al. study do
not provide the necessary differentiation
to properly update the emission factors
for unprotected (i.e., not cathodically
protected) steel and cathodically
protected steel pipeline mains. For more
information on the review and analysis
of the Lamb et al. and Weller et al.
studies, see the subpart W TSD,
available in the docket for this
rulemaking (Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2023–0234).
In consideration of our review and
analysis of recent study data relative to
natural gas pipeline mains and services,
and consistent with the emission factors
used in the 2016 U.S. GHG Inventory,
we are proposing to provide emission
factors for distribution pipeline mains
and services based on the Lamb et al.
study leak rates and the 1996 GRI/EPA
study leak incidence data. For more
information on the derivation of the
proposed emission factors, see the
subpart W TSD, available in the docket
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
for this rulemaking (Docket Id. No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234).
We are also seeking comments on
alternative methods for quantifying and
reporting emissions from distribution
mains and services. For distribution
mains and services, we are seeking
comments on the use of direct
measurement as well as application of a
leaker emission factor approach. For the
use of direct measurement, we are
seeking comment on whether facilities
should be permitted to develop facilityspecific distribution main and service
emission factors for each type of
pipeline material based on direct
measurements and if so, what the
appropriate number of measurements
should be for determining a
representative emission factor for each
pipeline material including supporting
rationale. For facility-specific emission
factors based on direct measurement, we
are seeking comment on the
development of both leaker emission
factors and population emission factors.
We are seeking comment on what
quantification techniques are best suited
for measuring emissions from
distribution pipeline leaks and whether
these techniques require digging down
to the pipeline in order to quantify
emissions and also verify pipeline
characteristics. For a leaker emission
factor approach, we are specifically
interested in what survey techniques are
appropriate and why, including
supporting information on specific
instruments and their detection
capabilities and whether certain
methods are more suitable for the
survey of distribution pipeline leaks
than others. We are seeking comment on
the scope and frequency of leak
detection surveys for distribution
pipelines and whether annual surveys
of the entire pipeline system or a
reduced frequency of survey (i.e., partial
surveys over a multi-year survey cycle
in which the entire system is surveyed
during the survey cycle and
approximately equal portions of the
system are surveyed each year of the
multi-year survey cycle) is more
appropriate and why. Finally, we are
seeking comment on application of a
leaker emission factor approach using
default factors (i.e., not facility specific
based on direct measurement) and
available data that could be used in the
development of default leaker emission
factors for distribution mains and
services.
For below grade stations, the 2016
U.S. GHG Inventory also began applying
a new emission factor from the data
published by Lamb et al. to the count of
stations to estimate emissions from
these sources. In order to assess the
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
appropriateness of incorporating this
revision into the subpart W
requirements for below grade stations
(i.e., replacing the set of below grade
emission factors by station type and
inlet pressure with one single emission
factor), the EPA performed an analysis
of the reported subpart W data for below
grade stations compared to data from
the recent studies (see the subpart W
TSD, available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2023–0234). We found that the
subpart W reported station count
combined with the current subpart W
emission factors yields an average
emission factor similar to the U.S. GHG
Inventory emission factor; as such,
using either set of emission factors
would yield approximately the same
emissions results for the GHGRP.
Therefore, we are proposing to amend
the emission factors for below grade
transmission-distribution transfer
stations and below grade meteringregulating stations in existing Table W–
7 (proposed Table W–5) to a single
emission factor without regard to inlet
pressure. We are also proposing to
amend the corresponding section header
in existing Table W–7 (proposed Table
W–5) for below grade station emission
factors and the references to existing
Table W–7 (proposed Table W–5) in 40
CFR 98.233(r)(6)(i) to clarify the
emission factor that should be applied
to both types of below grade stations
(i.e., transmission-distribution transfer
and metering-regulating). This proposed
amendment would impact the reporting
requirements in 40 CFR 98.236(r) as
well, as it would consolidate six
emission source types to two emission
source types (below grade transmissiondistribution transfer stations and below
grade metering-regulating stations,
without differentiating between inlet
pressures) for purposes of reporting
under 40 CFR 98.236(r)(1). This
proposed amendment would improve
the data quality through use of more
recent emission factors and would be
consistent with changes made to the
U.S. GHG Inventory. It would also result
in reporting of fewer data elements,
consistent with section II.C of this
preamble.
3. Gathering Pipeline Emission Factors
Facilities in the Onshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segment currently quantify the
emissions from equipment leaks from
gathering pipelines following the
procedures in 40 CFR 98.233(r). This
method uses the count of equipment,
subpart W population emission factors
in existing Table W–1A, and operating
time to estimate emissions. The
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
population emission factors for
gathering pipeline mains in existing
Table W–1A are based on leak rates
from natural gas distribution companies
and gathering pipeline-specific activity
data as provided in the 1996 GRI/EPA
study.114 The population emission
factors for gathering pipelines are
published per mile by pipeline material.
The EPA is aware of a recent study
that characterized emissions from
gathering pipelines and could
potentially be used to develop
population emission factors, Yu et al.
(2022).115 The Yu et al. (2022) study
used measurements acquired over four
aerial campaigns of the Midland and
Delaware sub-basins in the Permian
basin. The resulting emission rate
provides a basin-level population
emission factor (megagrams CH4 per
kilometer-year). The EPA is not
proposing to use this data in subpart W
for the development of gathering
pipeline emission factors because it
does not specify the pipeline material
type, as the current subpart W and
proposed subpart W emission factors
do. The material-specific emission
factors more readily allow operators to
track and quantify emission reductions
from pipeline replacement projects (e.g.,
replacing more leak prone pipeline
materials such as cast iron with less leak
prone materials such as plastic). The
resulting emission factors from Yu et al.
rely on emission estimation techniques
that have a lower degree of sensitivity
than ground-based measurements. In
order to overcome this limitation, the
study authors performed sensitivity
analyses to account for below detection
limit leaks. The major finding of this
study is that gathering pipelines have
highly skewed emissions data
distribution with very large leaks that
only occur every few hundred miles.
Finally, our assessment is that this
study is geographically limited and are
concerned that an emission factor
derived with these study data may not
be nationally representative. Additional
discussion of the Yu et al. study,
including population emission factors
developed using study data as they
114 GRI/EPA. Methane Emissions from the Natural
Gas Industry, Volume 9: Underground Pipelines.
Prepared for Gas Research Institute and U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency National Risk
Management Research Laboratory by L.M.
Campbell, M.V. Campbell, and D.L. Epperson,
Radian International LLC. GRI–94/0257.2b, EPA–
600/R–96–080i. June 1996. Available in the docket
for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
2023–0234.
115 Yu, J. et al. ‘‘Methane Emissions from Natural
Gas Gathering Pipelines in the Permian Basin.’’
Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 2022, 9, 969–974.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50353
compare to subpart W, is included in
the subpart W TSD, available in the
docket for this rulemaking (Docket Id.
No. v). We are seeking comment on the
EPA’s decision not to use the Yu et al.
study data in developing proposed
population emission factors, including
rationale supporting the EPA’s decision
or rationale for why this study should
be used in developing proposed
population emission factors.
Additionally, we are seeking comments
on whether there are other published
studies the EPA should evaluate for
potential use in developing revised
emission factors for gathering pipelines.
As noted previously in this section,
the EPA is proposing to update the
natural gas distribution population
emission factors in existing Table W–7
(proposed Table W–5) to subpart W
using the results of studies and
information that were not available
when the rule was originally finalized.
In particular, the EPA is proposing to
update the leak rate portion of the
emission factor based on data published
by Lamb et al. in 2015.116
The EPA has reviewed the recent
studies published for Onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities including the
previously discussed Yu et al. study, as
well as the additional studies for
pipeline distribution mains, and
concluded none of the studies provide
new emissions data or activity data
specific to gathering pipelines suitable
to update the existing emission factors.
Therefore, consistent with the updates
to the emission factors for distribution
mains, and consistent with section II.B
of this preamble, we are proposing to
revise the gathering pipeline population
emission factors in proposed Table W–
1 to use the leak rates from Lamb et al.
(2015). We are not proposing to update
the activity data (leaks per mile of
pipeline) portion of the emission
factors, as the information in the 1996
GRI/EPA study continues to be the best
available data specific to gathering
pipelines. For more information on the
proposed updates to the gathering
pipeline population emission factors,
see the subpart W TSD, available in the
docket for this rulemaking (Docket Id.
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234).
We are also seeking comments on
alternative methods for quantifying and
reporting emissions from gathering
pipelines. We are seeking comments on
the use of direct measurement as well as
116 Lamb, B.K. et al. ‘‘Direct Measurements Show
Decreasing Methane Emissions from Natural Gas
Local Distribution Systems in the United States.’’
Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 5161–5169.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50354
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
R. Offshore Production
Currently, subpart W requires offshore
production facilities to report emissions
consistent with the methods published
by the U.S. Department of Interior,
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
(BOEM). Since subpart W was first
promulgated, there have been a number
of updates to the BOEM requirements
and how BOEM implements the
requirements (e.g., the development of
their Outer Continental Shelf Air
Quality System (OCS AQS) 117), and the
EPA is proposing to amend subpart W
to reflect those changes. Specifically,
the EPA is proposing to update outdated
acronym ‘‘BOEMRE’’ to the current
acronym ‘‘BOEM’’ in 40 CFR 98.232(b),
40 CFR 98.233(s), and 40 CFR 98.236(s);
to update the cross references to the
BOEM requirements from ‘‘30 CFR
250.302 through 304’’ to ‘‘30 CFR
550.302 through 304’’ in 40 CFR
98.232(b), 40 CFR 98.233(s), and the
introductory paragraph of 40 CFR
98.234; and to remove the outdated
references to ‘‘GOADS’’ from 40 CFR
98.233(s). The EPA is also proposing to
adjust some of the language in 40 CFR
98.232(b) and 40 CFR 98.233(s) to more
accurately reflect the current BOEM
program and requirements (e.g.,
adjusting the number of years between
BOEM data collection efforts from 4 to
3 years, referring to published data and
data submitted to BOEM rather than an
emissions study).
Emissions data are collected by BOEM
every few years. In years that coincide
with a year in which BOEM collects
data, offshore production facilities that
report emissions inventory data to
BOEM report the same annual emissions
to subpart W as calculated and reported
to BOEM (existing 40 CFR 98.233(s)(1))
and facilities that do not report
emissions inventory data to BOEM must
use the most recent monitoring and
calculation methods published by
BOEM (existing 40 CFR 98.233(s)(2)). In
the intervening years, reporters
currently are required to adjust
emissions based on the operating time
for the facility in the current reporting
year relative to the operating time in the
most recent BOEM data submission or
BOEM emissions study publication
year. The EPA is proposing two
revisions for these intervening years.
First the EPA is proposing to require
reporters to report two new data
elements in these years, the facility’s
operating hours in the current year and
the facility’s operating hours from the
BOEM emission study publication year
that is the basis for the reported
emissions. This information would
improve verification, consistent with
section II.C of this preamble. Second, as
an alternative to the current adjustment
using operating hours in years that do
not overlap with the most recent BOEM
data submission or BOEM emissions
study publication year, as applicable,
the EPA is also proposing to allow
reporters to calculate emissions using
the most recent monitoring and
calculation methods published by
BOEM referenced in 30 CFR 550.302
117 For more information on this system and the
emissions inventories collected by the system, see
https://www.boem.gov/environment/environmentalstudies/ocs-emissions-inventories.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
application of a leaker emission factor
approach. For the use of direct
measurement, we are seeking comment
on whether facilities should be
permitted to develop facility-specific
emission factors for each type of
pipeline material based on direct
measurements and if so, what the
appropriate number of measurements
should be for determining a
representative emission factor for each
pipeline material including supporting
rationale. For facility-specific emission
factors based on direct measurement, we
are seeking comment on the
development of both leaker emission
factors and population emission factors.
We are seeking comment on what
quantification techniques are best suited
for measuring emissions from gathering
pipeline leaks and whether these
techniques require digging down to the
pipeline in order to quantify emissions
and also verify pipeline characteristics.
For a leaker emission factor approach,
we are specifically interested in what
survey techniques are appropriate and
why, including supporting information
on specific instruments and their
detection capabilities and whether
certain methods are more suitable for
the survey of gathering pipeline leaks
than others. We are seeking comment on
the scope and frequency of leak
detection surveys for gathering
pipelines and whether annual surveys
of the entire pipeline system or a
reduced frequency of survey (i.e., partial
surveys over a multi-year survey cycle
in which the entire system is surveyed
during the survey cycle and
approximately equal portions of the
system are surveyed each year of the
multi-year survey cycle) is more
appropriate and why. Finally, we are
seeking comment on application of a
leaker emission factor approach using
default factors (i.e., not facility specific
based on direct measurement) and
available data that could be used in the
development of default leaker emission
factors for gathering pipelines.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
through 304 (implemented through the
OCS AQS). This alternative is expected
to improve data quality through the use
of more empirical data, consistent with
section II.B of this preamble.
Finally, to better align the emissions
reported by offshore production
facilities between BOEM’s Outer
Continental Shelf Emissions Inventory
and the GHGRP, the EPA is proposing
that offshore production facilities report
the BOEM Facility IDs that constitute
the GHGRP facility. Having a definitive
point of reference between the two
datasets would allow the EPA to better
verify the emissions reported to the
GHGRP.
S. Combustion Equipment
1. Clarifications of Calculation
Methodology Applicability
All facilities reporting under subpart
W except those in the Onshore Natural
Gas Transmission Pipeline industry
segment must include combustion
emissions in their annual report.
Facilities in the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production, Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting, and Natural Gas
Distribution industry segments calculate
emissions in accordance with the
provisions in 40 CFR 98.233(z) and
report combustion emissions per 40 CFR
98.236(z). Reporters in the other
industry segments calculate and report
combustion emissions under subpart C
(General Stationary Fuel Combustion
Sources). Subpart W refers reporters in
these segments to the calculation
methodologies in subpart C to
determine combustion emissions for
certain fuels. Specifically, 40 CFR
98.233(z)(1) specifies that reporters may
use any tier of subpart C if the fuel
combusted is listed in Table C–1; the
paragraph further specifies that the
subpart C methodologies may only be
used for fuel meeting the definition of
‘‘natural gas’’ in 40 CFR 98.238 if it is
also of pipeline quality specification
and has a minimum HHV of 950 British
thermal units per standard cubic foot
(Btu/scf). If the fuel is natural gas that
does not meet these criteria, field gas,
process vent gas, or a blend containing
field gas or process vent gas, 40 CFR
98.233(z)(1) specifies that the
procedures in 40 CFR 98.233(z)(2)
should be used to calculate combustion
emissions.
Certain stakeholders have identified
several concerns with these
requirements. In general, these
stakeholders have stated that the ability
to use subpart C calculation
methodologies is too restrictive, and
some of their feedback also indicates
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
they may have been misinterpreting
some of the provisions. We are
proposing several amendments to these
provisions to address these concerns,
which would improve the accuracy of
the emissions calculated and therefore
the quality of data collected, consistent
with section II.B of this preamble.
First, a stakeholder indicated that
some member companies have been
interpreting the existing provisions of
40 CFR 98.233(z)(1)(ii) that require
emissions to be reported according to 40
CFR 98.236(z) and not subpart C to
mean that reporters with combustion
sources at onshore petroleum and
natural gas production facilities, at
onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facilities, and at
natural gas distribution facilities must
use the calculation methodologies in
subpart W for all fuel types rather than
subpart C (even given the provisions in
40 CFR 98.233(z)(1) that reference
subpart C for certain fuels).118 The
existing provisions of 40 CFR
98.233(z)(1)(ii) are intended to refer
only to the reporting requirements and
are not intended to define which
calculation methodologies can be used.
In the existing rule, the provisions in
the 40 CFR 98.233(z)(1) introductory
text define which calculation
methodologies can be used, and 40 CFR
98.233(z)(1)(ii) simply indicates that all
reporters with combustion sources at
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facilities, at onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities, and at natural gas
distribution facilities must report those
emissions in the e-GGRT system under
subpart W rather than under subpart C.
As part of the amendments described in
this section, consistent with section II.D
of this preamble, 40 CFR 98.233(z)(1)(ii)
is proposed to be moved to 40 CFR
98.233(z)(5), and we are proposing
wording changes to highlight that this
paragraph refers only to the requirement
to report combustion emissions under
subpart W and does not preclude
reporters from using subpart C methods
to calculate emissions if they qualify to
do so under proposed 40 CFR
98.233(z)(1) (and proposed 40 CFR
98.233(z)(2), as described later in this
section. We are also proposing to add a
reference to this new proposed
paragraph 40 CFR 98.233(z)(5) in both
proposed 40 CFR 98.233(z)(1)(ii) and
proposed 98.233(z)(2)(ii).
118 Letter from GPA Midstream Association to
Mark de Figueiredo, U.S. EPA, providing
information in response to EPA questions during
the meeting on March 23, 2016. May 18, 2016.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
Second, a stakeholder has asked for
EPA guidance regarding whether field
gas that is of pipeline quality meets the
criteria to use the subpart C
methodologies under the existing 40
CFR 98.233(z)(1),119 and the stakeholder
noted that ‘‘field gas’’ is not defined
within existing subpart W or subpart A
(General Provisions). The terms ‘‘field
gas’’ and ‘‘field quality’’ are frequently
used interchangeably by the industry,
but the EPA also recognizes that some
streams in the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segment that industry would
generally call ‘‘field gas’’ can be natural
gas (as defined in 40 CFR 98.238) of
pipeline quality with a minimum HHV
of 950 Btu/scf. After consideration of
these concerns, the EPA is proposing to
revise 40 CFR 98.233(z)(1) to remove the
references to field gas and process vent
gas and include only the characteristics
for the fuels that can use subpart C
methodologies. The EPA’s intent is to
indicate that a stream colloquially
referred to as ‘‘field gas’’ that otherwise
meets the three criteria to use the
subpart C methodologies for combustion
emissions (i.e., (1) meets the definition
of ‘‘natural gas’’ in 40 CFR 98.238; (2)
is of pipeline quality specification; and
(3) has a minimum HHV of 950 Btu/scf)
may use subpart C methodologies. The
EPA is also proposing conforming edits
to existing 40 CFR 98.233(z)(2)
(proposed 40 CFR 98.233(z)(3) in this
proposed rule) for consistency.
Third, certain reporters have
indicated in questions submitted to the
GHGRP Help Desk that the term
‘‘pipeline quality’’ is used in existing 40
CFR 98.233(z)(1) but it is not defined in
subpart W. In addition, a stakeholder
has opined that the emissions calculated
using subpart C and subpart W
calculation methodologies are similar
for many fuel streams that are not
natural gas of pipeline quality
specification with a minimum HHV of
950 Btu/scf. Therefore, the stakeholder
suggested that the EPA should allow
subpart C calculation methodologies to
be used for a wider variety of fuels (if
not all fuels in the segments that report
combustion emissions under subpart
W).120
119 Letter from GPA Midstream Association to
Mark de Figueiredo, U.S. EPA, providing
information in response to EPA questions during
the meeting on March 23, 2016. May 18, 2016.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
120 See Letter from GPA Midstream Association to
Mark de Figueiredo, U.S. EPA, providing
information in response to EPA questions during
the meeting on March 23, 2016. May 18, 2016. See
also Letter from Matt Hite, GPA Midstream
Association, to Mark de Figueiredo, U.S. EPA, Re:
Additional Information on Suggested Part 98,
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50355
We have reviewed this stakeholder’s
analysis and conducted our own
analysis of additional hypothetical fuel
compositions. In general, we observed
that the agreement of emissions as
calculated using subpart C calculation
methodologies for natural gas and using
subpart W calculation methodologies
varies based on the composition, with
the largest differences resulting for fuel
streams with high CO2 content. We also
observed that for these fuels, emissions
calculated using subpart W calculation
methodologies generally showed better
agreement with emissions calculated
using the subpart C calculation
methodology for natural gas when using
a site-specific HHV (Tier 2) than with
emissions calculated using the subpart
C calculation methodology that uses a
default HHV (Tier 1). For more
information on our fuel composition
analysis and the comparison of
emissions using various composition
thresholds, see the subpart W TSD,
available in the docket for this
rulemaking (Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2023–0234).
Based on our analysis, we are
proposing to add numeric composition
thresholds for natural gas to a new
proposed paragraph in 40 CFR
98.233(z)(2) that define the fuels for
which an owner or operator may use
subpart C methodologies. In particular,
we are proposing that subpart C
methodologies Tier 2 or higher may be
used for fuel meeting the definition of
‘‘natural gas’’ in 40 CFR 98.238 if it has
a minimum HHV of 950 Btu/scf, a
maximum CO2 content of 1 percent by
volume, and a minimum CH4 content of
85 percent by volume. We are not
proposing to amend the existing
provisions in 40 CFR 98.233(z)(1) that
allow the use of any subpart C
calculation methodology for natural gas
of pipeline quality specification with a
minimum HHV of 950 Btu/scf (other
than the proposed clarifications noted
earlier in this section). We are also
proposing to move the existing
provisions for fuels that do not meet the
specifications to use subpart C
methodologies from 40 CFR 98.233(z)(2)
to a new proposed paragraph 40 CFR
98.233(z)(3). This proposed amendment
would allow reporters to use subpart C
methodologies for a wider variety of fuel
streams while still ensuring data
quality. We request comment on the
natural gas specifications included in
proposed 40 CFR 98.233(z)(2), including
the values proposed for the maximum
Subpart W Rule Revisions to Reduce Burden.
September 13, 2019. Both letters are available in the
docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50356
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
CO2 content and minimum CH4 content,
as well as whether additional
specification criteria should be included
(e.g., a maximum HHV).
2. Methane Slip from Internal
Combustion Equipment
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
The authors of several recent studies
have examined combustion emissions at
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting facilities and
have demonstrated that a significant
portion of emissions can result from
unburned CH4 entrained in the exhaust
of natural gas compressor engines (also
referred to as ‘‘combustion slip’’ or
‘‘methane slip’’). These studies contend
that emissions from natural gas
compressor engines included in the
GHGRP are significantly underestimated
because they do not account for
combustion slip.121 The EPA performed
a review of each of these studies and the
U.S. GHG Inventory to determine
whether and how combustion slip
emissions have been incorporated into
published data and how the
incorporation of combustion slip would
affect the emissions from the petroleum
and natural gas system sector reported
to the GHGRP (see the subpart W TSD,
available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2023–0234).
In the 2022 Proposed Rule, we
proposed methods to quantify and
report combustion slip in subpart C and
subpart W from compressor drivers for
all subpart W industry segments that
currently report combustion emissions
in subpart C or subpart W. The emission
estimation methods provided in the
2022 Proposed Rule were the use of
default emission factors or default
combustion efficiencies for compressor
drivers based on recent study data. We
received comments on the 2022
Proposed Rule requesting methods to
quantify combustion slip using original
equipment manufacturer (OEM) data
and direct measurement. We also
received comments that while
compressor drivers likely represent the
largest number of reciprocating engines
in service at petroleum and natural gas
facilities, there are reciprocating engines
that do not drive compressors and other
engine types (e.g., GT) that emit CH4
from combustion slip. We have
performed additional review of the
121 Zimmerle et al., Characterization of Methane
Emissions from Gathering Compressor Stations:
Final Report (October 2019 Revision) and Vaughn
et al., ‘‘Methane Exhaust Measurements at
Gathering Compressor Stations in the United
States,’’ Environmental Science & Technology.
2021, 55 (2), 1190–1196, both available in the
docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
combustion slip emission source type as
detailed below. In this rulemaking, we
are continuing to propose the
quantification and reporting of
combustion slip from subpart W
facilities that currently report
combustion emissions in subpart C or
subpart W. However, in consideration of
the comments received on the 2022
Proposed Rule and the directives under
CAA 136(h), we are broadening the
applicability of the combustion slip
quantification and reporting methods to
all RICE and GT and additionally
providing three methods for quantifying
slip including default emission factors
or combustion efficiencies, OEM data,
or direct measurement. We are also
proposing some revisions to the 2022
Proposed Rule for the reporting of
combustion emissions for RICE and GT
for subpart W facilities that report their
combustion emissions to subpart C after
performing a more detailed review of
the subpart C e-GGRT combined unit
reporting configurations.
Based on the EPA’s review and
analysis, there appears to be combustion
slip for RICE and GT, which are used
primarily to drive compressors, at oil
and gas facilities. In addition, while the
recent studies are focused on the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting industry
segment, the EPA’s literature review
found the presence of combustion slip
in different industry segments, so it
appears that combustion slip is
dependent on the type of internal
combustion equipment and not the
application (i.e., we expect combustion
slip from RICE or GT regardless of the
industry segment). We also considered
that other EPA programs such as AP–42:
Compilation of Air Pollutant Emissions
Factors; 40 CFR part 60, subpart JJJJ; and
40 CFR part 63, subpart ZZZZ consider
emissions from internal combustion
equipment (i.e., RICE or GT) irrespective
of their use to drive a compressor or the
industry segment in which the engine
operates.
Therefore, consistent with section II.A
of this preamble, we are proposing to
revise the methodologies for
determining combustion emissions from
RICE and GT, including those that drive
compressors, to account for combustion
slip. For the three subpart W industry
segments reporting combustion
emissions to subpart W (Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production,
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting, and Natural
Gas Distribution), we are proposing that
RICE and GT combusting natural gas
that qualify to determine emissions
using the subpart C calculation
methodologies per 40 CFR 98.233(z)(1)
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
and proposed new 98.233(z)(2),122
would have three options in proposed
40 CFR 98.233(z)(4) to quantify
emissions from combustion slip,
including direct measurement using a
performance test, the use of OEM data,
or the use of default emission factors.
For facilities that conduct a performance
test to calculate combustion slip, we are
proposing in 40 CFR 98.233(z)(4)(i) that
the performance test would be required
one time, in accordance with one of the
test methods in proposed 40 CFR
98.234(i), which include EPA Methods
18 and 320 as well as an alternate
method, ASTM D6348–12. If a facility is
required to or elects to conduct a
performance test for any reason, we are
proposing that they must use the results
of the test for estimating emissions. The
results of the performance test would be
used to develop an emission factor for
use in the emissions calculations for
CH4. For facilities electing to use OEM
data, which may include manufacturer
specification sheets, emissions
certification data, or other manufacturer
data providing expected emission rates
from the RICE or GT, we are proposing
that the reporter would use the OEM
data to develop an emission factor for
use in their emissions calculations for
CH4. Concerning OEM data, we are
seeking comment on whether OEM data
is expected to be representative of field
conditions. Further, we are considering
proposing requirements for the OEM
supplied data including defining a
standardized testing program for engine
families similar to those that underly
the emissions certification process for
the engine NSPS in 40 CFR part 60
subparts IIII and JJJJ (e.g., Parts 1054 and
1065). These programs define the
number of engines in a family that are
required to be tested as a number (e.g.,
30) or a percentage of engines produced
in a year. The programs also define the
methods for testing the engines
(including engine load, test duration,
etc.) as well as deterioration factors for
adjusting for the degradation of
performance that is expected over time.
Alternatively, we are considering that
manufacturers perform the same type of
testing incorporated in proposed 40 CFR
98.234(i) for a certain number of engines
in an engine family. We are seeking
comments on these considerations
including how the manufacturer testing
program should be structured and more
specifically: how many engines should
be tested in an engine family; under
122 See section III.S.1 of this preamble for
information on the proposed amendments to 40
CFR 98.233(z) to increase the flexibility for
reporters to use the subpart C calculation
methodologies.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
what load(s) should the engines be
tested; what testing methods should be
used; what is the appropriate duration
of the test; and whether a deterioration
factor be included to account for
degradation of performance over time.
We are also considering whether to add
reporting requirements for the results of
performance tests conducted by
manufacturers. Finally, for facilities
electing to the use the default emission
factors, which were developed using
data from Zimmerle et al. (2019), we are
proposing that the reporter would be
required to select the appropriate
emission factor by equipment type (e.g.,
2-stroke lean-burn, 4-stroke lean-burn,
4-stroke rich-burn, or GT) in proposed
new Table W–7 rather than the emission
factors in Table C–2 for use in their
emissions calculations for CH4. The
precise derivation of the proposed
emission factors is discussed in more
detail in the subpart W TSD, available
in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–
0234.
For the three subpart W industry
segments reporting combustion
emissions to subpart W (Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production,
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting, and Natural
Gas Distribution), we are proposing a
default equipment specific combustion
efficiency (proposed to be provided in
equations W–39A and W–39B) for RICE
and GT that must be used to determine
emissions using the subpart W
calculation methodologies per existing
40 CFR 98.233(z)(2) (proposed 40 CFR
98.233(z)(3)). The default combustion
efficiency would account for methane
slip, and be combined with fuel
composition to calculate emissions. We
are not proposing to provide options for
reporters to conduct performance tests
or use OEM data for such RICE and GT.
The fuel types covered by the methods
in existing 40 CFR 98.233(z)(2)
(proposed 40 CFR 98.233(z)(3)) are
expected to be highly variable in
composition over the course of the year,
such that a one-time performance test or
OEM data are not expected to be
representative of the annual emissions.
We expect that the records necessary
to confirm the value for the
development of an emission factor
based on the results of a performance
test or OEM data are already required to
be maintained by the facility per 40 CFR
98.237; thus, no new recordkeeping
provisions relative to the combustion
slip amendments are being proposed.
We are proposing to add new reporting
requirements to 40 CFR 98.236(z)(2)
specifically for internal combustion
engines that combust natural gas that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
meets the criteria of proposed 40 CFR
98.233(z)(1) or (2) to specify the
equipment type of reported internal
combustion units, the method used to
estimate the CH4 emission factor, and
the value of the emission factor to
facilitate verification of the reported
emissions. Under the existing reporting
structure, facilities can group internal
combustion engines by the unit type
and the fuel type. The proposed
amendments would require further
disaggregation of the reporting of
natural gas-fired internal combustion
engine and GT CH4 emissions as units
grouped for reporting must share the
same equipment type (e.g., 4-stroke rich
burn), fuel type, and method for
determining the CH4 emission factor,
which will allow the EPA to adequately
verify the data.
For the subpart W industry segments
that estimate and report their
combustion emissions to subpart C, we
are proposing amendments in subpart C
analogous to the proposed amendments
described in this section for the three
industry segments that estimate and
report their combustion emissions to
subpart W (i.e., Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production, Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting, and Natural Gas
Distribution). Specifically, the facilities
that report their combustion emissions
to subpart C and currently use either
equation C–8, C–8a, C–8b, C–9, C–9a, or
C–10 in 40 CFR 98.33(c), as it
corresponds to the Tier methodology
selected to estimate their CO2 emissions,
to estimate CH4 emissions. These
equations rely on the use of a default
CH4 emission factor from Table C–2 to
estimate emissions. We are proposing to
require that natural gas-fired RICE or GT
located at these facilities would be
required to use one of the options in
proposed 40 CFR 98.233(z)(4) to
estimate CH4 emissions. Specifically, we
are proposing to revise the ‘‘EF’’ term in
each of the equations in 40 CFR 98.33(c)
(i.e., equations C–8, C–8a, C–8b, C–9a,
C–9b, and C–10) to reference the options
for developing a CH4 emission factor in
proposed 40 CFR 98.233(z)(4) for
natural gas-fired RICE or GT. We are
also proposing to add a footnote to
Table C–2 that specifies that for
reporters subject to subpart W, the
default CH4 emission factor in Table C–
2 for natural gas may only be used for
natural gas-fired combustion units that
are not RICE or GT. Finally, we are
proposing to amend 40 CFR 98.36(b),
(c)(1), and (c)(3) specifically for RICE or
GT at facilities that are subject to
subpart W. These provisions currently
provide the requirements for reporting
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50357
by emission unit, by aggregation of units
or by common pipe configurations.
Under the proposed amendments, we
are requiring reporters which report
emissions in accordance with 40 CFR
98.36(b), (c)(1), or (c)(3) to provide the
equipment type (e.g., two stroke lean
burn RICE), the method used to
determine the CH4 emission factor and
the average value of the CH4 emission
factor. This proposed change would
ensure that sufficient data in the overall
aggregation of units or common pipe
(i.e., multiple units combusting natural
gas) is reported such that we can
perform review of the supplied emission
factor data and perform verification on
the corresponding emissions. Overall,
these proposed amendments to the
subpart C reporting requirements are
analogous to and consistent with what
is being required for RICE or GT for
facilities that report combustion
emissions to subpart W.
3. Higher Heating Value for Calculating
N2O
As noted previously, there are subpart
W specific methods for quantifying
combustion equipment emissions for
facilities that report their combustion
emissions to subpart W in existing 40
CFR 98.233(z)(2) (proposed (z)(3) in this
proposed rule). For quantifying
emissions from N2O specifically, the
existing rule specifies the use of
equation W–40. This equation requires
the fuel throughput, the HHV of the
fuel, and the use of a default emission
factor. For field gas or process vent gas,
the variable definition for the HHV
provides that either a site-specific or
default value may be used. We are
proposing, consistent with section II.B
of this preamble, to amend the
definition of the variable for the HHV to
require the use of a site-specific value
because we believe the site-specific
value more accurately accounts for the
more variable fuel compositions that
exist in field or process gas. Our
assessment is that the methods for
calculating CO2 and CH4 in 40 CFR
98.233(z)(2)(ii) (proposed (z)(3)(ii) in
this proposed rule) already require the
use of site-specific values for the
hydrocarbon streams going to the
combustion unit; therefore, we expect
that a site-specific HHV is known (or
can be calculated using the
compositional data) without incurring
additional burden, while increasing the
accuracy of the emissions estimate.
4. Other Calculation Methodology
Clarifications Applicability
To determine the concentrations of
hydrocarbon constituents in the flow of
gas to the combustion unit, existing 40
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50358
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
CFR 98.233(z)(2)(ii) specifies that
reporters must either use a continuous
gas composition analyzer (if one is
present) or the procedures specified in
40 CFR 98.233(u)(2). For onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities, 40 CFR 98.233(u)(2)
specifies use of the annual average gas
composition based on the most recent
available analysis of the gas received at
the facility. However, one stakeholder
has indicated that for fuels using the
existing provisions of 40 CFR
98.233(z)(2) to calculate emissions, the
requirements for determining the gas
composition could result in inaccurate
calculations of emissions for some
facilities because onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities do not necessarily use the gas
received at their facility for
combustion.123 For example, if the gas
received at the facility is not suitable for
combustion, they may mix the gas with
purchased natural gas. In that case, the
annual average composition of gas
received at the facility would not be
representative of the gas sent to the
combustion unit (as required by existing
40 CFR 98.233(z)(2)), which could result
in inaccurate emissions. Therefore, the
EPA is proposing to revise the language
in 40 CFR 98.233(z)(2)(ii) (proposed 40
CFR 98.233(z)(3)(ii)(B) in this proposed
rule) to allow the use of engineering
estimates based on best available data to
determine the concentration of gas
hydrocarbon constituent in the flow of
gas to the unit. This proposed
amendment would allow reporters to
use the best information available to
determine the gas composition while
maintaining the option for reporters to
use 40 CFR 98.233(u)(2) if they do not
have other stream-specific information.
This proposed amendment is expected
to improve the accuracy of the
emissions calculated and therefore the
quality of data collected, consistent with
section II.B of this preamble.
We are also proposing amendments to
clarify that emissions may be calculated
for groups of combustion units. The
existing provisions of 40 CFR
98.233(z)(2) (proposed 40 CFR
98.233(z)(3)(ii)) could be interpreted to
specify that emissions must be
calculated for each individual
combustion unit. However, because
123 See Letter from GPA Midstream Association to
Mark de Figueiredo, U.S. EPA, providing
information in response to EPA questions during
the meeting on March 23, 2016. May 18, 2016. See
also Letter from Matt Hite, GPA Midstream
Association, to Mark de Figueiredo, U.S. EPA, Re:
Additional Information on Suggested Part 98,
Subpart W Rule Revisions to Reduce Burden.
September 13, 2019. Both letters are available in the
docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
combustion emissions and activity data
are reported as combined totals for each
type of combustion device, fuel type,
and method for determining the CH4
emission factor (for RICE and GT), it is
generally not necessary to calculate
emissions for each individual unit
before aggregating the total emissions.
For example, if the volume of fuel
combusted is determined at a single
location upstream of several combustion
units, emissions may be determined for
that combined volume of fuel (i.e., for
that group of combustion units). In other
words, it would not be necessary in this
example case to apportion a volume of
fuel to each unit, calculate emissions
separately, and then combine them
again. If the combustion units
downstream of this shared measurement
point are a mix of combustion device
types, the emissions and the volume of
fuel would still need to be apportioned
between those combustion device types
for reporting purposes; however,
reporters may elect to perform that
apportioning either before or after
emissions are calculated, as appropriate,
as long as the group of combustion units
does not include any natural gas
internal combustion equipment
including RICE or GT. If any of the
combustion units downstream of this
shared measurement point are natural
gas-driven internal combustion
equipment including RICE or GT, the
volumes of fuel for those units would
have to be separated from the total
before emissions are calculated to
account for the differences in
combustion efficiency, as described in
section III.S.2 of this preamble. Some of
the tiers in subpart C similarly allow for
calculation of emissions by groups of
units combusting the same fuel, so we
are proposing to include analogous
language to that in subpart C in 40 CFR
98.233(z)(1)(ii) and 40 CFR
98.233(z)(2)(ii) to provide for these
clarifications in how to calculate.
5. Location of Reporting Requirements
for Combustion Equipment
Section 136(h) of the CAA specifies
the following concerning reporting:
‘‘Not later than 2 years after the date of
enactment of this section, the
Administrator shall revise the
requirements of subpart W of part 98 of
title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, to
ensure the reporting under such
subpart, and calculation of charges
under subsections (e) and (f) of this
section, are based on empirical data,
including data collected pursuant to
subsection (a)(4), accurately reflect the
total CH4 emissions and waste
emissions from the applicable facilities,
and allow owners and operators of
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
applicable facilities to submit empirical
emissions data, in a manner to be
prescribed by the Administrator, to
demonstrate the extent to which a
charge under subsection (c) is owed.’’
As noted in this excerpt, the IRA directs
the Administrator to ensure reporting
under subpart W accurately reflects total
CH4 emissions from applicable facilities.
Apart from onshore natural gas
transmission pipeline facilities, all
facilities subject to subpart W must
include combustion emissions in their
annual report. As noted in section III.S.1
of this preamble, facilities in the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production, Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting,
and Natural Gas Distribution industry
segments must calculate combustion
emissions in accordance with 40 CFR
98.233(z) and report emissions under
subpart W. Facilities in the remaining
industry segments (i.e., Offshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production,
Onshore Natural Gas Processing,
Onshore Natural Gas Transmission
Compression, Underground Natural Gas
Storage, LNG Storage, and LNG Import
and Export Equipment) are required to
calculate combustion emissions in
accordance with the provisions of 40
CFR 98.33 and report emissions under
subpart C.
The EPA is seeking comment on
amending subpart W to specify that all
industry segments would be required to
report their combustion emissions,
including CH4, under subpart W to more
accurately reflect the total CH4
emissions from such facilities within
the emissions reported under subpart
W. Using RY2021 data for combustion
sources, we determined that requiring
combustion emissions from all oil and
gas operations to be reported to subpart
W rather than subpart C would increase
total subpart W CH4 emissions by less
than 1 percent. If the amendments to
combustion slip discussed in section
III.S.2 of this preamble are finalized, the
reported CH4 emissions from
combustion are expected to increase,
but we estimate the increase in total CH4
emissions from combustion devices at
facilities subject to subpart W would be
less than 5 percent. Under this
approach, we would consider
continuing to allow all the industry
segments that currently report
combustion emissions under subpart C
(i.e., Offshore Petroleum and Natural
Gas Production, Onshore Natural Gas
Processing, Onshore Natural Gas
Transmission Compression,
Underground Natural Gas Storage, LNG
Storage, and LNG Import and Export
Equipment) to use the same subpart C
calculation methodologies as they
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
currently use in order to minimize the
burden on affected facilities. This
amendment, however, would result in
changes to their reporting structure, as
subpart W does not currently contain
the same methods to report via a
common pipe for fuel streams or by
aggregation of units as provided in
subpart C. Instead, for subpart W,
combustion emissions are aggregated by
fuel type, combustion equipment type,
and if finalized, by the method used for
estimating combustion slip, when
applicable. There are also exclusions for
reporting combustion emissions in 40
CFR 98.233(z)(5) and (6), specifically for
external combustion equipment with a
rated heat capacity of less than 5 million
British thermal units per hour (MMBtu/
hr) and internal combustion equipment
with a rated heat capacity of less than
1 MMBtu/hr. Under this approach, we
expect that these exemptions would
apply to the facilities newly subject to
subpart W. Similarly, under this
approach, we expect that the
exemptions in subpart C would no
longer apply to these facilities. The
exemptions that we expect may impact
facilities under this approach are the
subpart C exclusions of reporting
emissions from portable and emergency
equipment in 40 CFR 98.30(a) and (b).
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
T. Leak Detection and Measurement
Methods
1. Acoustic Leak Detection
For emission source types for which
measurements are required, subpart W
specifies the methods that may be used
to make those measurements in 40 CFR
98.234(a). To improve the quality of the
data when an acoustic leak detection
device is used, consistent with section
II.B of this preamble, we are proposing
two revisions to the acoustic
measurement requirements in 40 CFR
98.234(a)(5). First, for stethoscope type
acoustic leak detection devices (i.e.,
those designed to detect through-valve
leakage when put in contact with the
valve body and that provide an audible
leak signal but do not calculate a leak
rate), we are proposing that a leak is
detected if an audible leak signal is
observed or registered by the device.
Second, we are proposing that if a leak
is detected using a stethoscope type
device, then that leak must be measured
using one of the quantification methods
specified in 40 CFR 98.234(b) through
(d) and that leak measurement must be
reported regardless of the volumetric
flow rate measured. These proposed
revisions would improve the accuracy
of emissions reported for compressors
and transmission tanks when an
acoustic leak detection device is used.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
2. High Volume Samplers
We are proposing two revisions to the
high volume sampler methods to
improve the quality of the data when
high volume samplers are used for flow
measurements, consistent with section
II.B of this preamble. First, we are
proposing to add detail to 40 CFR
98.234(d)(3) to clarify the calculation
methods associated with high volume
sampler measurements. Generally, high
volume samplers measure CH4 flow, not
whole gas flow. However, the current
calculation methods in 40 CFR
98.234(d)(3) treat the measurement as a
whole gas measurement. Therefore, we
are proposing to clarify the calculation
methods needed if the high volume
sampler outputs CH4 flow in either a
mass flow or volumetric flow basis.
Specifically, we are proposing methods
to determine natural gas (whole gas)
flows based on measured CH4 flows.
Second, we are proposing to add a
paragraph at 40 CFR 98.234(d)(5) to
clarify how to assess the capacity limits
of a high volume sampler. Currently, 40
CFR 98.234(d) simply states to ‘‘Use a
high volume sampler to measure
emissions within the capacity of the
instrument’’; there is no other
information provided to clarify what
‘‘within the capacity of the instrument’’
means or how it is determined. We
understand that there are different
manufacturers, but most common high
volume samplers report maximum
sampling rates of 10 to 11 cubic feet per
minute (cfm) and maximum CH4 flow
quantitation limits of 6 to 8 cfm. Based
on our review of reported high volume
sampler measurements, we found that 2
to 5 percent of high volume sampler
measurements for all types of
compressor sources (for both centrifugal
and reciprocating compressors) are
likely at or beyond the expected
capacity limits of the high volume
sampler instrument. Considering actual
sampling rates, gas collection
efficiencies near the sampling rates, and
reported CH4 quantitation limits relative
to maximum sampling rates, we
determined that whole gas flow rates
exceeding 70 percent of the device’s
maximum rated sampling rate is an
indication that the device will not
accurately quantify the volumetric
emissions, which we deem to exceed
the capacity of the device. Therefore, we
are proposing to specify that CH4 flows
above the manufacturer’s CH4 flow
quantitation limit or total volumetric
flows exceeding 70 percent of the
manufacturer’s maximum sampling rate
indicate that the flow is beyond the
capacity of the instrument and that flow
meters or calibrated bags must be used
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50359
to quantify the flow rate. For more
information on our review, see the
subpart W TSD, available in the docket
for this rulemaking (Docket Id. No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234).
U. Industry Segment-Specific
Throughput Quantity Reporting
1. Throughput Information for the
Future Implementation of the Waste
Emissions Charge
As noted in section I.E of this
preamble, the waste emissions charge
specifies segment-specific thresholds
(Waste Emissions Threshold) for
segments subject to the waste emissions
charge. For the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production and Offshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production
industry segments, the Waste Emissions
Threshold is specified in CAA section
136(f)(1) as, ‘‘(A) 0.20 percent of the
natural gas sent to sale from such
facility;’’ or ‘‘(B) 10 metric tons of
methane per million barrels of oil sent
to sale from such facility, if such facility
sent no natural gas to sale.’’ For the
Onshore Petroleum And Natural Gas
Gathering And Boosting, Onshore
Natural Gas Processing, Onshore
Natural Gas Transmission Compression,
LNG Storage, LNG Import and Export
Equipment, and Onshore Natural Gas
Transmission Pipeline industry
segments, the Waste Emissions
Threshold is defined in CAA section
136(f)(2) and (3) as a percentage of
‘‘natural gas sent to sale from or through
such facility,’’ with the percentages
specified varying by segment.
To align the subpart W reporting
elements with text used in CAA section
136 and enable verification of
throughput-related reporting elements,
consistent with section II.C of this
preamble, we are proposing a
combination of new reporting elements
and amendments to existing segmentspecific throughput reporting
requirements in 40 CFR 98.236(aa).
We are proposing to add the word
‘‘natural’’ in front of ‘‘gas’’ at each
occurrence where it is used in the
throughput reporting elements in
subpart W that are being revised to align
with CAA section 136. We note that the
CAA section 136 text uses the term
‘‘oil’’ and we are clarifying in this
preamble that for the purposes of
subpart W the term ‘‘oil’’ has the same
meaning as ‘‘crude oil,’’ which is used
in the throughput reporting elements in
subpart W and defined in subpart A of
part 98.
We are also generally proposing
revisions to ensure that the verbiage of
‘‘sent to sales’’ or ‘‘through the facility’’
is reflected in the reporting elements, as
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50360
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
applicable. We are also proposing in 40
CFR 98.236(aa) that the quantities sent
to sales or through the facility be
measured, as it is reasonable to expect
that the quantities of these products are
closely tracked. We request comment on
situations in which a reporter may not
be measuring the quantity ‘‘sent to
sales’’ or ‘‘through the facility.’’
Aside from these overarching
proposed amendments, there are
industry segment-specific proposed
amendments for the Onshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Production, Offshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production,
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting, and Onshore
Natural Gas Processing industry
segments as described in the remainder
of this section.
a. Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production and Offshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production
For the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production and Offshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production
industry segments, the current
requirements for reporting throughputs
of crude oil are combined with volumes
of condensate. These volumes will need
to be reported separately in order to
align with the CAA section 136(f) oil
threshold for production facilities, when
applicable. Therefore, we are proposing
the separation of these reporting
elements into two distinct reporting
elements in both 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(1)(i)
and 98.236(aa)(2).
For consistency with CAA section
136, we are proposing to use the phrase
‘‘sent to sale’’ in 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(1)(i)(B) through (D), 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(1)(iii)(C) through (E), and 40
CFR 98.236(aa)(2)(i) through (vi) instead
of ‘‘for sale,’’ the phrase used in the
existing data elements. This proposed
amendment is for consistency in
language rather than any expected
difference in the volumes to be reported
or the interpretation of the terms, as the
existing term was intended to have the
same meaning. As described in section
III.D of this preamble, we are also
proposing additional throughput data
elements to provide separate, well-level
reporting of throughputs associated with
wells in the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production and Offshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production
industry segments that are permanently
shut-in and plugged. These proposed
data elements, if finalized, are
anticipated to be useful in the future
evaluation of the associated exemptions
in CAA section 136(f)(7).
Specifically for the Offshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production
industry segment, the existing
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
throughput requirements are for ‘‘gas
handled’’ at the platform, which
includes production volumes as well as
volumes transferred via pipeline from
another location. We note that the term
‘‘gas handled’’ is not used by other
reporting programs to which offshore
production facilities also report, such as
the BOEM or the U.S. Energy
Information Administration (EIA). We
have also recently received a question
through the GHGRP Help Desk asking
about differences in throughput between
the published BOEM data for the
parameter, lease production reporting,
and throughput volumes published in
the subpart W data, so there are
potentially differences in the ways
reporters are interpretating and
reporting the ‘‘gas handled’’ data
element as compared to production
volumes reported to other programs. In
order to provide consistency with the
language in CAA section 136 across
both production industry segments and
help the EPA implement CAA section
136, we are proposing to revise the
reporting elements in 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(2) for the Offshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Production industry
segment so they are analogous to those
in Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production. We are seeking comment on
whether we should add the proposed
throughputs as new data elements and
continue to retain the existing reporting
elements in 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(2)(i) and
(ii), including the rationale for
maintaining the existing reporting
elements.
b. Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting
Through our verification efforts, it has
become apparent that the reporting of
some of the throughput volumes for the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting industry
segment are incomplete in the sense that
they do not include all the quantities of
natural gas (and hydrocarbon liquids)
transported from the facility (i.e.,
leaving the facility). In some cases, this
appears to be due to the specific
wording of the reporting elements in
existing 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(10)(ii) and
(iv) that appear to limit the quantities to
the quantities transported to four
specific downstream endpoints (e.g.,
processing plants). However, the EPA
indicated in the preamble to the final
rule that added the Onshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segment that the throughputs
transported from the facility were
intended to be the total quantities
transported downstream (80 FR 64280,
October 22, 2015). Therefore, be
consistent with the EPA’s original intent
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
for these data elements, we are
proposing to amend 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(10)(ii) and (iv) to clarify that
the downstream endpoints listed in the
current reporting elements are examples
of potential destinations and to specify
that the reported quantities should be
the natural gas or hydrocarbon liquids,
respectively, transported to downstream
operations such as one of those
endpoints. We are also proposing to add
storage facilities to the list of
downstream operations to make the list
of examples more comprehensive.
Finally, for consistency with the text in
CAA section 136 and to help the EPA
implement CAA section 136 in the
future, we are proposing to amend 40
CFR 98.236(aa)(10)(ii) to specify that the
natural gas is transported ‘‘through the
facility’’ and then to a downstream
operation. As a result of these proposed
amendments, the reported quantities
should include all natural gas and
hydrocarbon liquids transported
downstream from the facility (i.e.,
leaving the basin or leaving the
gathering system owner or operator).
In addition to reviewing the reported
throughputs, we also reviewed the
definitions in subpart W associated with
the industry segment and the facility.
For the Onshore Petroleum and Natural
Gas Gathering and Boosting industry
segment, we found that the definitions
for ‘‘Gathering and boosting system’’
and ‘‘Gathering and boosting system
owner or operator’’ in 40 CFR 98.238
specified that an onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting
system or owner or operator must
receive natural gas or petroleum from an
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facility. Those definitions
would exclude facilities that receive
natural gas or petroleum from other
onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facilities and do
not receive any natural gas or petroleum
from onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facilities. Therefore, there
are potentially entire onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities or volumes of gas through
onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facilities that are
unaccounted for under the existing rule.
We are proposing to amend the
definition of ‘‘Gathering and boosting
system’’ and ‘‘Gathering and boosting
owner or operator’’ in 40 CFR 98.238 to
specify that these systems may receive
natural gas and/or petroleum from one
or more other onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting
systems in addition to production
facilities.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
c. Onshore Natural Gas Processing
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Subpart W currently requires onshore
natural gas processing facilities to report
the quantity of natural gas received at
the gas processing plant in existing 40
CFR 98.236(aa)(3)(i), however, the rule
does not currently specify whether the
volume is all natural gas that enters the
facility—including natural gas that
passes through the facility without
being processed further (i.e., ‘‘passthrough volumes’’)—or just natural gas
received for processing. As discussed in
section III.U.1 of this preamble, to
maintain consistency with subpart NN
and reduce burden for fractionators, the
EPA is proposing to revise 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(3)(i) to specify that the
subpart W quantity of gas received is the
gas received for processing and is also
proposing that fractionators do not have
to report a quantity under 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(3)(i) if they report under
subpart NN. Subpart NN does not
require reporting of the gas leaving the
facility, but to maintain consistency in
the interpretation of the throughputs, to
date, the EPA has provided guidance to
facilities that the volume reported in
accordance with 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(3)(ii) is that which has been
processed at the facility and should
exclude volumes of gas that are of
pipeline specification and only passed
through the facility.
However, to be consistent with CAA
section 136(f)(2), the throughput should
include all volumes of natural gas
which pass through the facility or are
sent to sales. Therefore, considering the
proposed amendments to 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(3)(i) and guidance that has
been historically provided for 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(3)(ii), a new reporting
element for natural gas processing
throughput is needed to fully capture all
volumes through the facility (i.e., those
that are processed and those that pass
through the facility which are not
processed). As such, we are proposing
to add a new reporting element for the
Onshore Natural Gas Processing
industry segment in 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(3)(ix) to capture all natural
gas that is processed and/or passed
through the facility consistent with the
text in CAA section 136 (i.e., ‘‘natural
gas sent to sale from or through
facilities’’).
2. Onshore Natural Gas Processing and
Natural Gas Distribution Throughputs
Also Reported Under Subpart NN
Onshore Natural Gas Processing
plants are required to report seven
facility-level throughput-related items
under subpart W, as specified in
existing 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(3). These
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
seven data reporting elements include:
quantities of natural gas received and
processed gas leaving the gas processing
plant, cumulative quantities of NGLs
received and leaving the gas processing
plant, the average mole fractions of CH4
and CO2 in the natural gas received, and
an indication of whether the facility
fractionates NGLs. Natural Gas
Distribution companies are also
required to report seven throughput
volumes under subpart W, as specified
in existing 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(9). These
seven data reporting elements include:
the quantity of gas received at all
custody transfer stations; the quantity of
natural gas withdrawn from in-system
storage; the quantity of gas added to insystem storage; the quantity of gas
delivered to end users; the quantity of
gas transferred to third parties; the
quantity of gas consumed by the LDC for
operational purposes; and the quantity
of gas stolen.
The EPA has received stakeholder
comments related to some of these
reporting elements.124 These
stakeholders have commented that the
reporting elements included in subpart
W are redundant with data reported
elsewhere within the GHGRP,
specifically under subpart NN
(Suppliers of Natural Gas and Natural
Gas Liquids). Subpart NN requires NGL
fractionators and LDCs to report the
quantities of natural gas and natural gas
liquid products supplied downstream
and their associated emissions. For
example, for natural gas processing
plants, commenters stated that both
subparts require reporting of the volume
of natural gas received and the volume
of NGLs received. Subpart W also
requires reporting of total NGLs leaving
the processing plant, while subpart NN
requires reporting of the volume of each
individual NGL product supplied. For
LDCs, these commenters have stated
that some duplicative reporting is
required as well. For example,
commenters stated that both subparts
require reporting of the volume of
natural gas received, volume placed into
and out of storage each year, and
volume transferred to other LDCs or to
a pipeline as well as some other
duplicative data. In addition,
commenters stated that the reporting
elements included in subparts W and
Docket Id. Nos. EPA–HQ–OA–2017–0190–
46726, EPA–HQ–OA–2017–0190–1958, EPA–HQ–
OA–2017–0190–2066 available in Compilation of
Comments Related to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Program submitted to the Department of Commerce
under Docket ID No. DOC–2017–0001 and the
Environmental Protection Agency under Docket ID
No. EPA–HQ–OA–2017–0190 and in the docket for
this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–
2023–0234.
PO 00000
124 See
Frm 00081
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50361
NN for LDCs are redundant with data
reported to the EIA on Form EIA–176,
the Annual Report of Natural and
Supplemental Gas Supply and
Disposition.125 The commenters
explained that subpart W and subpart
NN collect nearly the same data, and
stated that discrepancies between the
data sets are due to the use of
inconsistent terminology. Commenters
also suggested that due to the
redundancy and availability of data
reported to the EIA for LDCs, the EPA
should remove the throughput-related
reporting requirements for the Natural
Gas Distribution industry segment from
the GHGRP altogether. Commenters
added that if the requirements are
maintained, the EPA should reconcile
the terminology used within the GHGRP
and clarify the reporting elements.
The EIA report is submitted in the
spring of each year and covers the
previous calendar year. After
completing internal audits of the
reports, EIA publishes the data for each
LDC on its website in the fall. The EIA
data provides detailed information on
the volume of gas received, gas stored,
gas removed from storage, gas deliveries
by sector, and HHV data. The EPA
previously reviewed the possibility of
obtaining data by accessing existing
Federal Government reporting and
provided the following response in the
subpart NN response to public
comments document accompanying the
2009 Final Rule: 126
• The EPA ‘‘decided not to modify
the final rule because collecting data
directly in a central system will enable
the EPA to electronically verify all data
reported under this rule quickly and
consistently, to use the information for
non-statistical purposes, and to handle
confidential business information in
accordance with the Clean Air Act.’’
• In the specific case of subpart NN,
the EPA also ‘‘determined that it could
not rely on EIA data to collect facilitylevel data from fractionators and
company-level data from LDCs.’’
• Additionally, the EPA ‘‘seeks data
that is beyond what EIA collects, such
as quality assurance information,
verification data, and information on
odorized propane’’ and ‘‘data on sitespecific HHV and carbon content from
those sites that choose to sample and
125 Form EIA–176 is available at the U.S. EIA
website at https://www.eia.gov/survey/form/eia_
176/form.pdf; the Form EIA–176 Instructions are
available at https://www.eia.gov/survey/form/eia_
176/instructions.pdf.
126 See page 7 of EPA Response to Public
Comment Vol. 39 Subpart NN at https://
www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/ghgrp-2009-final-ruleresponse-comments-documents, also available in
the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50362
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
test products rather than use default
emission factors.’’
After further review of the data
available through EIA, the stakeholder
comments described earlier in this
section, and the reporting requirements
in subpart W and subpart NN, the EPA
is proposing to eliminate duplicative
elements from subpart W for facilities
that report to subpart NN, consistent
with section II.C of this preamble. The
EPA is proposing to amend the
reporting requirements in 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(3) for Onshore Natural Gas
Processing plants that both fractionate
NGLs (approximately 100 of the 450
subpart W natural gas processing plants)
and also report as a supplier under
subpart NN. For this subset of facilities,
the EPA reviewed the data from subpart
W and subpart NN and determined that
there are no gas processing plants that
report as fractionators under subpart W
that do not also report under subpart
NN without supplying a valid
explanation.127 During this review, the
EPA found that some of the data
elements included in subpart W overlap
with data elements in subpart NN.
Specifically, the data elements in 40
CFR 98.236(aa)(3)(i), (iii) and (iv) of
subpart W overlap with data elements in
subpart NN as specified in 40 CFR
98.406(a)(3), 98.406(a)(1) and (2),
98.406(a)(4)(i) and (ii), respectively.128
To eliminate reporting redundancies,
the EPA is proposing several
amendments to 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(3).
First, to clarify which facilities have
data overlap between subparts W and
NN, the EPA is proposing to add a
reporting element for natural gas
processing plants at 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(3)(viii) to indicate whether
they report as a supplier under subpart
NN. Next, the EPA is proposing that
facilities that indicate that they both
fractionate NGLs and report as a
supplier under subpart NN would no
longer be required to report the
quantities of natural gas received or
NGLs received or leaving the gas
processing plant as specified in 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(3)(i), (iii) and (iv); this data
would continue to be reported under
subpart NN as specified in 40 CFR
98.406(a)(3), 98.406(a)(1) and (2),
98.406(a)(4)(i) and (ii), respectively,
thus, maintaining the ability to verify
associated emissions reported under
subpart W. See Table 3 of this preamble
for more information.
These facilities would, however, be
required to continue reporting the data
elements specified in 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(3)(ii) and (v) through (viii), as
these reporting elements do not overlap
with subpart NN reporting elements.
Natural gas processing plants that do
not fractionate or that fractionate but do
not report as a supplier under subpart
NN would continue to report all of the
reporting elements for natural gas
processing plants as specified in 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(3).
The EPA is also proposing to remove
the reporting elements for throughput
for LDCs in 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(9). The
EPA reviewed the data from subpart W
and subpart NN and determined that
there are no LDCs that report under
subpart W that do not also report under
subpart NN. In fact, an average of 385
LDCs report under subpart NN, while
170 LDCs report under subpart W.
Subpart NN therefore provides more
comprehensive coverage of the Natural
Gas Distribution industry segment.
Additionally, subpart NN has been in
effect for LDCs since RY2011 while
subpart W throughput information has
only been collected since RY2015; thus,
subpart NN has a more robust historical
data set. During this review, the EPA
determined that the data elements found
in 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(9)(i) through (v) of
subpart W overlap with data elements in
subpart NN as specified in 40 CFR
98.406(b)(1) through (3), 98.406(b)(5)
and (6), and 98.406(b)(13). To eliminate
reporting redundancies, the EPA is
proposing to remove these reporting
elements from subpart W.
Table 3 of this preamble shows all the
duplicative data elements that the EPA
is proposing to remove from subpart W
for facilities that also report to subpart
NN.
TABLE 3—LIST OF PROPOSED SUBPART W DATA ELEMENTS TO BE REMOVED WHERE ANALOGOUS SUBPART NN DATA
ELEMENTS ARE REPORTED
Subpart W data elements proposed to be eliminated
Citation
Analogous Subpart NN data elements
Description
Citation
Description
Local Distribution Companies
§ 98.236(aa)(9)(i) .......................
Quantity of natural gas received at all custody transfer stations.
§ 98.406(b)(1)
§ 98.406(b)(5).
§ 98.236(aa)(9)(ii) ......................
Quantity of natural gas withdrawn from insystem storage.
§ 98.406(b)(3) ..........
§ 98.236(aa)(9)(iii) .....................
Quantity of natural gas added to in-system storage.
Quantity of natural gas delivered to end
users.
§ 98.406(b)(2) ..........
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
§ 98.236(aa)(9)(iv) .....................
127 One such explanation is that the gas
processing plant fractionates NGLs to supply fuel
for use entirely on-site (i.e., the fuel is not supplied
downstream). Due to definitional differences
between the two subparts, this facility is defined as
a fractionator for purposes of subpart W but is not
a supplier that must report under subpart NN.
128 While it is the EPA’s intention that the
reported quantity of natural gas received at the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
§ 98.406(b)(13)(i)
through (iv).
facility in existing 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(3)(i) should be
the quantity of natural gas received for processing,
consistent with the requirement to report the
annual volume of natural gas received for
processing in existing 40 CFR 98.406(a)(3), some
reporters have indicated in correspondence with
the EPA via e-GGRT that they are including gas that
is received at but not processed by the onshore
natural gas processing facility (i.e., gas that was
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Annual volume of natural gas received by
the LDC at its city gate stations and Annual volume natural gas that bypassed
the city gate(s).
Annual volume natural gas withdrawn
from on-system storage and annual volume of vaporized LNG withdrawn from
storage.
Annual volume of natural gas placed into
storage or liquefied and stored.
Annual volume of natural gas delivered by
the LDC to residential consumers, commercial consumers, industrial consumers, electricity generating facilities.
processed elsewhere and passes through the
onshore natural gas processing facility). Therefore,
to clarify the EPA’s intention and reinforce the
consistency of the subpart W and subpart NN
quantities, the EPA is proposing to revise 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(3)(i) to indicate that that reported
quantity should be natural gas received at the gas
processing plant for processing in the calendar year.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
50363
TABLE 3—LIST OF PROPOSED SUBPART W DATA ELEMENTS TO BE REMOVED WHERE ANALOGOUS SUBPART NN DATA
ELEMENTS ARE REPORTED—Continued
Subpart W data elements proposed to be eliminated
Analogous Subpart NN data elements
Citation
Description
Citation
Description
§ 98.236(aa)(9)(v) ......................
Quantity of natural gas transferred to third
parties.
§ 98.406(b)(6) ..........
Annual volume of natural gas delivered to
downstream gas transmission pipelines
and other LDCs.
Natural Gas Processing Plants That Fractionate NGLs
§ 98.236(aa)(3)(i) .......................
Quantity of natural gas received ...............
§ 98.406(a)(3) ..........
§ 98.236(aa)(3)(iii) .....................
Cumulative quantity of all NGLs (bulk and
fractionated) received.
§ 98.406(a)(2)
§ 98.406(a)(4)(i).
§ 98.236(aa)(3)(iv) .....................
Cumulative quantity of all NGLs (bulk and
fractionated) leaving.
§ 98.406(a)(1)
§ 98.406(a)(4)(ii).
The EPA is also proposing to remove
the reporting elements for the volume of
natural gas used for operational
purposes and natural gas stolen
specified in 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(9)(vi)
and (vii). These reporting elements are
unique to subpart W, require additional
burden to estimate, and have not been
used for the EPA’s analyses of the
subpart W data. As a result of proposing
to remove all of the 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(9) data elements for the
reasons explained in this section of this
preamble, the EPA proposes to reserve
paragraph 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(9).
3. Onshore Natural Gas Transmission
Pipeline Storage Throughputs
Similar to Natural Gas Distribution
facilities, Onshore Natural Gas
Transmission Pipeline facilities are
currently required to report five
throughput volumes under subpart W,
as specified in existing 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(11). These five data reporting
elements include: the quantity of
natural gas received at all custody
transfer stations; the quantity of natural
gas withdrawn from in-system storage;
the quantity of gas added to in-system
storage; the quantity of gas transferred to
third parties; and the quantity of gas
consumed by the transmission pipeline
facility for operational purposes. As
noted in section III.U.1 of this preamble,
the EPA has received stakeholder
feedback on the reporting elements for
Natural Gas Distribution facilities,
including questions submitted to the
GHGRP Help Desk, regarding the term
‘‘in-system storage.’’ Although the
questions were specific to Natural Gas
Distribution facilities, the term ‘‘insystem storage’’ is also included in the
throughput reporting elements for
Onshore Natural Gas Transmission
Pipeline facilities at existing 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(11)(ii) and (iii). After
consideration of the stakeholder
feedback, the EPA is proposing to revise
these provisions to better characterize
Annual volume of natural gas received for
processing.
Annual quantity of each NGL product received and annual quantities of y-grade,
o-grade and other bulk NGLs received.
Annual quantity of each NGL product supplied and annual quantities of y-grade,
o-grade and other bulk NGLs supplied.
the existing term ‘‘in-system.’’
Specifically, we are proposing to amend
40 CFR 98.236(aa)(11)(ii) and (iii) to
replace the term ‘‘in-system’’ with
clarifying language that specifies
withdrawals/additions of natural gas
from storage are referring to
Underground Natural Gas Storage and
LNG Storage facilities that are owned
and operated by the onshore natural gas
transmission pipeline owner or operator
that do not report under subpart W as
direct emitters themselves. These
amendments are expected to improve
data quality consistent with section II.D
of this preamble.
V. Other Proposed Minor Revisions or
Clarifications
See Table 4 of this preamble for the
miscellaneous minor technical
corrections not previously described in
this preamble that we are proposing
throughout subpart W, consistent with
section II.D of this preamble.
TABLE 4—PROPOSED TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO SUBPART W
Section (40 CFR)
Description of proposed amendment
98.230(a)(2) ........................................................
98.230(a)(9) ........................................................
98.232 introductory text ......................................
Revise the instance of ‘‘well pad’’ to read ‘‘well-pad’’ to correct inconsistency in the term.
Remove the ‘‘)’’ after ‘‘GOR’’ to correct a typographical error.
Add reference to paragraph (l) of this section to clarify that annual reports must include the information specified in paragraph (l) if applicable.
Revise the instances of ‘‘acid gas removal vents’’ to read ‘‘acid gas removal unit vents’’ for
consistency with the defined term ‘‘Acid gas removal unit (AGR)’’ in 40 CFR 98.238.
Revise the instances of ‘‘AGR unit’’ to read ‘‘AGR’’ for consistency with the defined term ‘‘Acid
gas removal unit (AGR)’’ in 40 CFR 98.238.
Add ‘‘at the absorber inlet’’ to the end of the paragraph to clarify the location for the wet natural gas temperature and pressure to be used for modeling.
Revise the instances of ‘‘oil,’’ ‘‘oil/condensate,’’ and ‘‘liquid’’ to read ‘‘hydrocarbon liquids’’ for
consistency with the requirement in 40 CFR 98.233(j) to calculate emissions from ‘‘atmospheric pressure fixed roof storage tanks receiving hydrocarbon produced liquids,’’ as noted
in the 2015 amendments to subpart W (80 FR 64272, October 22, 2015).
Revise the introductory sentence in this section to specify that 40 CFR 98.233(k) does not
apply to condensate storage tanks that route emissions to flares or other controls for consistency with proposed amendment that would move procedures for calculating flared emissions from 40 CFR 98.233(k) to 40 CFR 98.233(n).
98.232(c)(17), (d)(5) and (j)(3) ...........................
98.233(d) .............................................................
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
98.233(e)(1)(x), 98.236(e)(1)(xi) and (xii) ...........
98.233(j), 98.236(j) .............................................
98.233(k) .............................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50364
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 4—PROPOSED TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO SUBPART W—Continued
Section (40 CFR)
Description of proposed amendment
98.233(n)(5) ........................................................
Correct the cross reference in the definition of the equation variable ‘‘Yj’’ from paragraph (n)(1)
to (n)(2).
Move the last sentence in each paragraph to be the second sentence to clarify that the calculation methodology for compressors routed to flares, combustion, or vapor recovery systems apply to all industry segments.
Revise the instances of ‘‘vapor recovery’’ to read ‘‘vapor recovery system’’ to correct inconsistency in the term.
Correct the internal cross reference from paragraph (o) to paragraph (p).
Add missing ‘‘in’’ to read ‘‘according to methods set forth in § 98.234(d).’’
Revise the instance of ‘‘CH’’ in the third sentence to read ‘‘CH4’’ to correct a typographical
error.
Correct the cross reference in the definition of the equation variable ‘‘Es,MR,i’’ and the equation
variable ‘‘CountMR’’ from paragraph (q)(9) to (q)(2)(xi) or (q)(3)(vii)(B).
Add reference to components listed in 40 CFR 98.232(i)(3), for consistency with proposed
amendments to 40 CFR 98.233(r)(6)(i).
Revise the definition of equation variable ‘‘Za’’ to include the sentence following the definition
of that variable to correct a typographical error.
Format the heading to be in italicized text.
Revise the instances of ‘‘high heat value’’ to read ‘‘higher heating value’’ to correct inconsistency in the term.
Remove unnecessary ‘‘constituent’’ from ‘‘CO2 constituent’’ and ‘‘methane constituent’’ and remove ‘‘gas’’ from ‘‘gas hydrocarbon constituent.’’ Add missing ‘‘the’’ to read ‘‘to the combustion unit’’ in several variable definitions.
Renumber the Peng Robinson equation of state from equation W–41 to equation W–46 to provide space for five new equations related to new source types in proposed 40 CFR
98.233(dd) and (ee).
Remove and reserve paragraph for provisions for best available monitoring methods for
RY2015, as reports for that reporting year can no longer be submitted to the EPA.
Remove and reserve paragraph for provisions for best available monitoring methods for
RY2016, as reports for that reporting year can no longer be submitted to the EPA.
Add missing ‘‘than’’ to read ‘‘report gas volumes at standard conditions rather than the gas
volumes at actual conditions’’
Edits to explicitly state that the reporting requirements in this section apply to pneumatic
pumps that are vented direct to atmosphere and for which emissions are calculated using
the default emission factor (Calculation Method 3).
Revise ‘‘operational’’ to ‘‘pumping liquid’’ in the description of the reported time element in
98.236(c)(5)(i) to be consistent with the proposed change described in section III.E.3 of this
preamble for Calculation Method 2.
Revise ‘‘natural gas flow rate’’ to read ‘‘natural gas feed flow rate’’ for consistency with the parameters listed in 40 CFR 98.233(d)(4)(i).
Revise the instances of ‘‘vented to’’ a control device, vapor recovery, or a flare to read ‘‘routed
to’’ to correct inconsistency in the phrases ‘‘vented to’’ and ‘‘routed to.’’
Revise the instances of ‘‘vapor recovery device’’ to read ‘‘vapor recovery system’’ to correct inconsistency in the term.
Clarify that the reported information in paragraphs (j)(1)(i) through (xvi) should only include
those atmospheric storage tanks with emissions calculated using Calculation Method 3.
Correct the internal cross reference from ‘‘§ 98.233(k)(2)’’ to ‘‘§ 98.233(k)(1).’’
Add a cross reference to § 98.233(k)(2) and revise sentence to specify that the reported method used to measure leak rates should be one provided in that section.
Revise the instances of ‘‘vented to a flare’’ to read ‘‘routed to a flare’’ to correct inconsistency
in the phrases ‘‘vented to’’ and ‘‘routed to.’’
Add a missing period at the end of the sentence.
Clarify that reporting for missing data procedures includes the procedures used to substitute
an unavailable value of a parameter (per 40 CFR 98.235(h)).
Correct the cross references from paragraph (l)(1)(iv), (l)(2)(iv), (l)(3)(iii), and (l)(4)(iii) to
(l)(1)(v), (l)(2)(v), (l)(3)(iv), and (l)(4)(iv), respectively.
Remove the second definition of ‘‘Facility with respect to natural gas distribution for purposes
of reporting under this subpart and for the corresponding subpart A requirements’’ to eliminate an inadvertent identical duplicative definition.
Replace Tables W–1 through W–7 with new Tables W–1 through W–6 to reorganize and consolidate the emission factor tables so that there are separate tables by pollutant (whole gas,
THC, and CH4) and by type of factor (population and leaker emission factors). Update cross
references to these tables accordingly throughout subpart W.
98.233(o) introductory text and (p) introductory
text.
98.233(o) introductory text and (p) introductory
text, 236(o)(2)(ii) and (p)(2)(ii).
98.233(p)(1)(i) .....................................................
98.233(p)(4)(ii)(C) ...............................................
98.233(r) introductory text ..................................
98.233(r), equations W–32A and W–32B ..........
98.233(r)(6)(ii) .....................................................
98.233(t)(2) .........................................................
98.233(u)(2)(ii) ....................................................
98.233(z) .............................................................
98.233(z), equations W–39A and W–39B ..........
98.234(e) .............................................................
98.234(f) ..............................................................
98.234(g) .............................................................
98.236 introductory text ......................................
98.236(c)(5)(i) through (iii) ..................................
98.236(d)(2)(iii)(B) ...............................................
98.236(e)(1) and (2) ...........................................
98.236(j)(2) .........................................................
98.236(k)(1)(iii) ....................................................
98.236(k)(2) ........................................................
98.236(l)(1), (2), (3), and (4) introductory text ...
98.236(p)(3)(ii) ....................................................
98.236(bb) ...........................................................
98.236(cc) ...........................................................
98.238 .................................................................
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Tables W–1 through W–7 to subpart W of part
98.
are finalized, to respond to the
comments and promulgate any
IV. Schedule for the Proposed
Amendments
The EPA is planning to consider the
comments on these proposed changes,
and, if any of the proposed amendments
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
amendments by August 16, 2024.129 We
129 Section 136(h) of the CAA requires subpart W
to be revised as specified in that provision ‘‘not
later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this
Frm 00084
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
are proposing that these amendments
would become effective on January 1,
2025, and that reporters would
implement the majority of the changes
beginning with reports prepared for
RY2025 and submitted March 31, 2026.
The exception is the proposed reporting
of the quantities of natural gas, crude
oil, and condensate produced that is
sent to sale in the calendar year for each
well permanently shut-in and plugged
(proposed 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(1)(iii)(C)
through (E) and proposed 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(2)(iv) through (vi)); those
provisions would become effective on
January 1, 2025 and reporters would
include that information in their reports
prepared for RY2024 and submitted
March 31, 2025. The submission date
for RY2025 reports is over a year after
we expect a final rule based on this
proposal to be finalized, if finalized,
thus providing a reasonable period for
reporters to adjust to any finalized
amendments. The proposed effective
date would also allow ample time for
the EPA to implement the changes into
e-GGRT.
We are likewise proposing that the
proposed CBI determinations discussed
in section VI of this preamble would
become effective on January 1, 2025.
The majority of the determinations are
for new or revised data elements that
would be included in annual GHG
reports prepared for RY2025 and
submitted March 31, 2026. The
determinations related to the reporting
of the quantities of natural gas, crude
oil, and condensate produced that is
sent to sale in the calendar year for each
well permanently shut-in and plugged
would apply the first year that data is
collected (i.e., RY2024 data submitted
on or before March 31, 2025). Finally,
there is one circumstance, discussed in
detail in section V of this preamble,
where the proposed determination
covers data included in annual GHG
reports submitted for prior years. In all
cases, the proposed determinations for
the data that the EPA has already
received for these prior years or receives
going forward for any reporting year
would become effective on January 1,
2025.
section.’’ The section was enacted via Public Law
No: 117–169 on August 16, 2022.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
V. Proposed Confidentiality and
Reporting Determinations for Certain
Data Reporting Elements
A. Overview and Background
In this action we are proposing
confidentiality determinations for new
or substantially revised data elements
that would be collected under the
proposed rule amendments.
1. Background on EPA’s Treatment of
Data Collected Under Part 98
Following proposal of part 98 (74 FR
16448, April 10, 2009), the EPA
received comments addressing the issue
of whether certain data could be entitled
to confidential treatment. In response to
these comments, the EPA stated in the
preamble to the 2009 Final Rule (74 FR
56387, October 30, 2009) that through a
notice and comment process, we would
establish those data elements that are
entitled to confidential treatment. This
proposal is one of a series of rules
dealing with confidentiality
determinations for data reported under
part 98, including subpart C (General
Stationary Fuel Combustion) and W
(Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems).
• 75 FR 39094, July 7, 2010. Describes
the data categories and category-based
determinations the EPA developed for
the part 98 data elements.
• 76 FR 30782, May 26, 2011;
hereafter referred to as the ‘‘2011 Final
CBI Rule.’’ Assigned data elements to
data categories and published the final
CBI determinations for the data
elements in 34 part 98 subparts, except
for those data elements that were
assigned to the ‘‘Inputs to Emission
Equations’’ data category.
• 77 FR 48072, August 13, 2012.
Finalized confidentiality determinations
for data elements reported under nine
subparts, including subpart W, except
for those data elements that are ‘‘inputs
to emission equations’’.
• 78 FR 69337, November 29, 2013.
Finalized determinations for new and
revised data elements in 15 subparts,
including subpart C, except for those
data elements that are ‘‘inputs to
emission equations’’.
• 79 FR 63750, October 24, 2014.
Revised recordkeeping and reporting
requirements for ‘‘inputs to emission
equations’’ for 23 subparts and finalized
confidentiality determinations for new
data elements in 11 subparts, including
subpart W.
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50365
• 79 FR 70352, November 25, 2014.
Finalized confidentiality determinations
for new and substantially revised data
elements in subpart W.
• 80 FR 64262, October 22, 2015.
Finalized confidentiality determinations
for new data elements in subpart W.
• 81 FR 86490, November 30, 2016.
Finalized confidentiality determinations
for new or substantially revised data
elements in subpart W.
• 81 FR 89188, December 9, 2016.
Finalized confidentiality determinations
for new or substantially revised data
elements in 18 subparts, including
subpart C.
• 87 FR 36920, June 21, 2022.
Describes the EPA’s revised approach to
assessing data in response to Food
Marketing Institute v. Argus Leader
Media, 139 S. Ct. 2356 (2019) (hereafter
referred to as Argus Leader).130
To support the proposed amendments
to part 98 described in section III of this
preamble, we are proposing
confidentiality determinations or
‘‘emission data’’ designations, in
keeping with our existing approach (see
section V.B.1 of this preamble), for the
following:
• New or substantially revised
reporting requirements (i.e., the
proposed change requires additional or
different data to be reported);
• Existing reporting requirements for
which the EPA did not previously
finalize a confidentiality determination
or ‘‘emission data’’ designation.
Further, we propose to designate
certain new or substantially revised data
elements as ‘‘inputs to emission
equations’’ falling within the definition
of ‘‘emission data.’’ For each element
that we propose would fall in this
category, we further propose whether
the data element would be directly
reported to the EPA or whether it would
be entered into e-GGRT’s Inputs
Verification Tool (IVT) (see section V.C
of this preamble for a discussion of
‘‘inputs to emission equations’’).
2. Summary of Data Elements Affected
by the Proposed Amendments to Part 98
Table 5 of this preamble provides the
number of affected data elements and
the affected subparts for each of these
proposed actions.
130 See
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
01AUP2
50366
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 5—SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTIONS RELATED TO DATA CONFIDENTIALITY
Number
of data
elements a
Proposed actions related to data confidentiality
New or substantially revised reporting requirements for which the EPA is proposing a confidentiality determination or ‘‘emission data’’ designation.
Existing reporting requirements for which the EPA is proposing a confidentiality determination or ‘‘emission data’’ designation because the EPA did not previously make a confidentiality determination or
‘‘emission data’’ designation.
New or substantially revised reporting requirements that the EPA is proposing be designated as ‘‘inputs
to emission equations’’ and for which the EPA is proposing reporting determinations.
Subpart(s)
522
C, W
1
W
162
W
a These data elements are individually listed in the memoranda: (1) Proposed Confidentiality Determinations and Emission Data Designations
for Data Elements in Proposed Revisions to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems (2) Proposed Reporting Determinations for Data Elements Assigned to the Inputs to Emission Equations Data Category in Proposed Revisions to the Greenhouse
Gas Reporting Rule for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems, available in the docket for this rulemaking (Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–
0234).
The majority of the proposed
determinations would apply at the same
time as the proposed schedule described
in section IV of this preamble. In the
case where the EPA is re-proposing from
the June 2022 proposal a determination
for an existing data element where one
was not previously made, the proposed
determination would be effective on
January 1, 2025, and would apply to
annual reports submitted for RY2025, as
well as all prior years that the data were
collected. The determination related to
the treatment of this prior year data will
not change how the data was actually
treated by the Agency, it will only
conform the text of the determination to
the actual confidentiality status the data
has had since it was first collected.
B. Proposed Confidentiality
Determinations and Emissions Data
Designations
1. Proposed Approach
The EPA is proposing to assess the
data elements in this proposed rule,
following the same approach as
described in the 2022 Proposed Rule (87
FR 36920, June 21, 2022). In that
proposal, the EPA described a revised
approach to assessing data in response
to Food Marketing Institute v. Argus
Leader Media, 139 S. Ct. 2356 (2019)
(hereafter referred to as Argus
Leader).131
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
131 In
the 2022 Proposed Rule (87 FR 36920, June
21, 2022), the EPA proposed that the Argus Leader
decision does not affect our historical approach to
designating data elements as ‘‘inputs to emission
equations’’ or our previous approach for designating
new and revised reporting requirements as
‘‘emission data,’’ which are described in the July 7,
2010 proposal (75 FR 39094), 2011 Final CBI Rule,
and October 24, 2014 final rule (79 FR 63750). For
reporting elements that the EPA did not designate
as ‘‘emission data’’ or ‘‘inputs to emission
equations,’’ the EPA proposed to revise the
historical approach to assign data elements to data
categories established in the 2011 Final CBI Rule,
and instead proposed to assess each individual
reporting element according to the Argus Leader
criteria.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
We propose to continue identifying
new and revised reporting elements that
qualify as ‘‘emission data’’ (i.e., data
necessary to determine the identity,
amount, frequency, or concentration of
the emission emitted by the reporting
facilities) by evaluating the data for
assignment to one of the four data
categories designated by the 2011 Final
CBI Rule to meet the CAA definition of
‘‘emission data’’ in 40 CFR
2.301(a)(2)(i) 132 (hereafter referred to as
‘‘emission data categories’’). Refer to
section II.B of the July 7, 2010, proposal
for descriptions of each of these data
categories and the EPA’s rationale for
designating each data category as
‘‘emission data.’’
For data elements designated as
‘‘inputs to emission equations,’’ the EPA
proposes to assign data elements to one
of two subcategories, including data
elements entered into IVT and those
directly reported to the EPA. See section
V.C of this preamble for further
descriptions of each of these data
categories.
For new or revised data elements that
the EPA does not propose to designate
as ‘‘emission data’’ or ‘‘inputs to
emission equations,’’ the EPA proposes
to assess each individual reporting
element according to the Argus Leader
standard, established in 2019.
Accordingly, we propose to evaluate
132 See section I.C of the July 7, 2010 proposal (75
FR 39100) for a discussion of the definition of
‘‘emission data.’’ As discussed therein, the relevant
paragraphs (to the GHGRP) of the CAA definition
of ‘‘emission data’’ include 40 CFR 2.301(a)(2)(i)(A)
and (C), as follows: (A) ‘‘Information necessary to
determine the identity, amount, frequency,
concentration, or other characteristics (to the extent
related to air quality) of any emission which has
been emitted by the source (or of any pollutant
resulting from any emission by the source), or any
combination of the foregoing;’’ and (C) ‘‘A general
description of the location and/or nature of the
source to the extent necessary to identify the source
and to distinguish it from other sources (including,
to the extent necessary for such purposes, a
description of the device, installation, or operation
constituting the source).’’
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
each new or revised data element not
designated as ‘‘emission data’’ or
‘‘inputs to emission equations’’
individually to determine whether the
information is customarily and actually
treated as private by the reporter and are
proposing a confidentiality
determination based on that evaluation.
Consistent with the 40 CFR part 2
procedures, this rulemaking provides an
opportunity for affected stakeholders to
justify any confidentiality claim they
may have for the data they are required
to submit under parts 98 (except for
emission data which are not entitled to
confidential treatment).
2. Proposed Confidentiality
Determinations and ‘‘Emission Data’’
Designations
In this section, we discuss the
proposed confidentiality determinations
and ‘‘emission data’’ designations for
522 new or substantially revised data
elements. We also discuss one existing
data element (i.e., not proposed to be
substantially revised) for which for no
determination has been previously
established.
a. Proposed Confidentiality
Determinations and ‘‘Emission Data’’
Designations for New or Substantially
Revised Data Reporting Elements
For the 522 new and substantially
revised data elements, the EPA is
proposing ‘‘emission data’’ designations
for 277 data elements and
confidentiality determinations for 245
data elements. The EPA is proposing to
designate 277 new or substantially
revised data elements as ‘‘emission
data’’ by assigning the data elements to
three emission data categories
(established in the 2011 Final CBI Rule
as discussed in section V.B.1 of this
preamble), as follows:
• 114 data elements that are proposed
to be reported under subpart W are
proposed to be assigned to the
‘‘Emissions’’ emission data category;
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
• 126 data elements that are proposed
to be reported under subparts C and W
are proposed to be assigned to the
‘‘Facility and Unit Identifier
Information’’ emission data category;
and
• 37 data elements that are proposed
to be reported under subparts C and W
are proposed to be assigned to the
‘‘Calculation Methodology and
Methodological Tier’’ emission data
category.
Refer to Table 1 in the memorandum,
Proposed Confidentiality
Determinations and Emission Data
Designations for Data Elements in
Proposed Revisions to the Greenhouse
Gas Reporting Rule for Petroleum and
Natural Gas Systems, available in the
docket for this rulemaking (Docket Id.
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234), for a
list of these 277 data elements proposed
to be designated as ‘‘emission data,’’ the
proposed emission data category
assignment for each data element, and
the EPA’s rationale for each proposed
‘‘emission data’’ category assignment.
The remaining 245 new and
substantially revised data elements
proposed to be reported under subpart
W are not proposed to be designated as
‘‘emission data,’’ or ‘‘inputs to emission
equations.’’ Rather, this proposal
assesses each individual reporting
element according to the Argus Leader
criteria as discussed in section V.B.1 of
this preamble. Refer to Table 2 in the
memorandum, Proposed Confidentiality
Determinations and Emission Data
Designations for Data Elements in
Proposed Revisions to the Greenhouse
Gas Reporting Rule for Petroleum and
Natural Gas Systems, to see a list of
these 245 specific data elements, the
proposed confidentiality determination
for each data element, and the EPA’s
rationale for each proposed
confidentiality determination. These
determinations show the data elements
that would be entitled to confidential
treatment if submitted to the EPA, and
those that the EPA would publish.
b. Proposed Confidentiality
Determinations for Existing Part 98 Data
Elements for Which No Determination
Has Been Previously Established
We are re-proposing one
confidentiality determination for a
single data element currently reported
under subpart W for which no
confidentiality determination or
‘‘emission data’’ designation has been
previously finalized under part 98. In
the 2022 Proposed Rule, we reviewed
previous rulemakings and found 26 data
elements where a confidentiality
determination or ‘‘emission data’’
designation had not been made under
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
subpart W. In the 2022 Proposed Rule,
we had evaluated these data elements
and proposed either confidentiality
determinations or ‘‘emission data’’
designations, using the categories
established in the 2011 Final CBI Rule.
This proposal would revise 25 out of 26
of these data elements. Therefore, these
25 revised data elements are included in
the proposed confidentiality
determinations and ‘‘emission data’’
designations discussed in section
V.B.2.a of this preamble, consistent with
our approach for other data elements
that we are proposing to revise in this
proposed rulemaking. That leaves one
existing data element for which no
previous determination has been
finalized. We assessed the one
remaining data element with no existing
confidentiality determination according
to the Argus Leader criteria and are reproposing the confidentiality
determination from the June 2022
Proposed Rule. Refer to Table 3 in the
memorandum, Proposed Confidentiality
Determinations and Emission Data
Designations for Data Elements in
Proposed Revisions to the Greenhouse
Gas Reporting Rule for Petroleum and
Natural Gas Systems, available in the
docket for this rulemaking (Docket Id.
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234), for
details of the confidentiality
determinations.
C. Proposed Reporting Determinations
for Inputs to Emissions Equations
In this section, we discuss data
elements that the EPA proposes to
assign to the ‘‘Inputs to Emission
Equations’’ data category. This data
category includes data elements that are
the inputs to the emission equations
used by sources that directly emit GHGs
to calculate their annual GHG
emissions.133 As discussed in section
VI.B.1 of the 2022 Proposed Rule (87 FR
36920, June 21, 2022), the EPA
determined that the Argus Leader
standard does not apply to our approach
for handling data elements assigned to
the ‘‘Inputs to Emission Equations’’ data
category.
The EPA organizes data assigned to
the ‘‘Inputs to Emission Equations’’ data
category into two subcategories. The
first subcategory includes ‘‘inputs to
emission equations’’ that must be
133 For facilities that directly emit GHGs, part 98
includes equations that facilities use to calculate
emission values. The ‘‘Inputs to Emission
Equations’’ data category includes the data elements
that facilities would be required to enter in the
equations to calculate the facility emissions values,
e.g., monthly consumption or production data or
measured values from required monitoring, such as
carbon content. See 75 FR 39094, July 7, 2010 for
a full description of the ‘‘Inputs to Emission
Equations’’ data category.
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50367
directly reported to the EPA. This is
done in circumstances where the EPA
has determined that the data elements
do not meet the criteria necessary for
them to be entered into the IVT system.
These ‘‘inputs to emission equations,’’
once received by the EPA, are not
entitled to confidential treatment. The
second subcategory includes ‘‘inputs to
emission equations’’ that are entered
into IVT. These ‘‘inputs to emission
equations’’ are entered into IVT to
satisfy the EPA’s verification
requirements. These data must be
maintained as verification software
records by the submitter, but the data
are not included in the annual report
that is submitted to the EPA. This is
done in circumstances where the EPA
has determined that the data elements
meet the criteria necessary for them to
be entered into the IVT system. Refer to
the memorandum, Proposed Reporting
Determinations for Data Elements
Assigned to the Inputs to Emission
Equations Data Category in Proposed
Revisions to the Greenhouse Gas
Reporting Rule for Petroleum and
Natural Gas Systems, available in the
docket for this rulemaking (Docket Id.
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234), for a
discussion of the criteria established in
2011 for evaluating whether data
assigned to the ‘‘Inputs to Emission
Equations’’ data category should be
entered into the IVT system.
We are proposing to assign 162 new
or substantially revised data elements in
subparts C and W to the ‘‘Inputs to
Emission Equations’’ data category. We
evaluated each of the 162 proposed new
or substantially revised data elements
assigned to the ‘‘Inputs to Emission
Equations’’ data category and
determined that none of these 162 data
elements meet the criteria necessary for
them to be entered into the IVT system;
therefore, we propose that these 162
data elements be directly reported to the
EPA. As ‘‘inputs to emission equations’’
are emissions data, these 162 data
elements would not be eligible for
confidential treatment once directly
reported to the EPA, and they would be
published once received by the EPA.
Refer to Table 1 in the memorandum,
Proposed Reporting Determinations for
Data Elements Assigned to the Inputs to
Emission Equations Data Category in
Proposed Revisions to the Greenhouse
Gas Reporting Rule for Petroleum and
Natural Gas Systems, available in the
docket for this rulemaking (Docket Id.
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234), for a
list of these 162 data elements proposed
to be designated as ‘‘inputs to emission
equations’’ that would be directly
reported to the EPA and the EPA’s
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50368
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
rationale for the proposed reporting
determinations.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
D. Request for Comments on Proposed
Amendments to 40 CFR Part 2, Category
Assignments, Confidentiality
Determinations, or Determinations of
Inputs To Be Reported
We solicit comment on the proposed
categories, confidentiality, and reporting
determinations in this proposed rule. By
proposing confidentiality
determinations prior to data reporting
through this proposal and rulemaking
process, we are providing potential
reporters an opportunity to submit
comments, particularly comments
addressing any data elements not
entitled to confidential treatment under
this proposal, but which reporters
customarily and actually treat as
private. Likewise, we provide potential
reporters an opportunity to submit
comments on whether there are
disclosure concerns for data elements
proposed to be categorized as ‘‘inputs to
emission equations’’ that we propose
would be directly reported to the EPA
via annual reports and subsequently
released by the EPA. This opportunity
to submit comments is intended to
provide reporters with the opportunity
to substantiate their confidentiality
claims that would ordinarily be afforded
to reporters when the EPA considers
claims for confidential treatment of
information in case-by-case
confidentiality determinations under 40
CFR part 2. In addition, the comment
period provides an opportunity to
respond to the EPA’s proposed
determinations with more information
for the Agency to consider prior to
finalization. We will evaluate the
comments on our proposed
determinations, including claims of
confidentiality and information
substantiating such claims, before
finalizing the confidentiality
determinations. Please note that this
will be reporters’ only opportunity to
substantiate a confidentiality claim for
data elements included in this proposed
rule where a confidentiality
determination or reporting
determination is being proposed. Upon
finalizing the confidentiality
determinations and reporting
determinations of the data elements
identified in this proposed rule, the EPA
will release or withhold these data in
accordance with 40 CFR 2.301(d), which
contains special provisions governing
the treatment of part 98 data for which
confidentiality determinations have
been made through rulemaking
pursuant to CAA sections 114 and
307(d).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
If members of the public have reason
to believe any data elements in this
proposed rule that are proposed to be
treated as confidential are not
customarily and actually treated as
private by reporters, please provide
comment explaining why the Agency
should not provide an assurance of
confidential treatment for such data.
Likewise, if members of the public have
reason to disagree with the EPA’s
proposal that ‘‘inputs to emission
equations’’ qualify to be entered into
IVT and retained as verification
software records instead of being
directly reported to the EPA, please
provide comment explaining why the
‘‘inputs to emission equations’’ do not
qualify to be entered into IVT, should be
directly reported to the EPA, and
subsequently released by the EPA. As
described in section III.D, the EPA is
proposing revisions to several existing
data elements within the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production
and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting industry
segments such that the data would be
reported by facilities at the site level.
Under the current requirements,
facilities report much of this
information aggregated across multiple
sites. Given that the proposed revisions
would require that facilities report more
specific information, the EPA is
requesting comment on the
confidentiality and reporting
determinations for this site-level
reporting. For any revised data elements
that fall into an ‘‘emissions data’’
category, the EPA is proposing that the
data would continue to be released
regardless of whether it is collected at
the site level or aggregated across sites.
However, for data elements that do not
fall into an ‘‘emissions data’’ category,
the EPA is seeking comment regarding
whether any of these particular data
elements are customarily and actually
treated as private together with specific
information supporting this position
when reported at the site level. The EPA
believes that the information in this
category that would not already be
released as emission data is not
information that is customarily and
actually treated as confidential by
submitters, even at the site level. The
EPA is aware of outlets where much of
this information is already released
publicly, such as State and local records
including records from oil and gas
permitting authorities, taxing
authorities, and environmental agencies,
U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC) forms for publicly
traded companies, company websites,
data services such as Enverus, S&P
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Global/IHS Markit, Rystad Energy and
Wood Mackenzie, and publications like
Oil &Gas Journal, Petroleum Economist,
and Upstream. Upon consideration of
comments, the EPA will consider
releasing this information directly as
proposed, or other options that may take
into account confidentiality concerns,
but still release as much of this valuable
information to the public as possible.
When submitting comments regarding
the confidentiality determinations or
reporting determinations we are
proposing in this action, please identify
each individual proposed new, revised,
or existing data element you consider to
be confidential or do not consider to be
‘‘emission data’’ in your comments. If
the data element has been designated as
‘‘emission data,’’ please explain why
you do not believe the information
should be considered ‘‘emission data’’
as defined in 40 CFR 2.301(a)(2)(i). If the
data has not been designated as
‘‘emission data’’ and is proposed to not
be entitled to confidential treatment,
please explain specifically how the data
element is commercial or financial
information that is both customarily and
actually treated as private. Particularly
describe the measures currently taken to
keep the data confidential and how that
information has been customarily
treated by your company and/or
business sector in the past. This
explanation is based on the
requirements for confidential treatment
set forth in Argus Leader. If the data
element has been designated as an
‘‘input to an emission equation’’ (i.e.,
not entitled to confidential treatment)
and proposed to be directly reported to
the EPA via annual reports and
subsequently released by the EPA,
please explain specifically why there
are disclosure concerns.
Please also discuss how this data
element may be different from or similar
to data that are already publicly
available, including data already
collected and published annually by the
GHGRP, as applicable. Please submit
information identifying any publicly
available sources of information
containing the specific data elements in
question. Data that are already available
through other sources would likely be
found not to qualify for confidential
treatment. In your comments, please
identify the manner and location in
which each specific data element you
identify is publicly available, 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
International Standard Book Number
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50369
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
(ISBN) or other identifier. For data
published on a website, provide the
address of the website, the date you last
visited the website and identify the
website publisher and content author.
Please avoid conclusory and
unsubstantiated statements, or general
assertions regarding the confidential
nature of the information.
Finally, we are not proposing new
confidentiality determinations and
reporting determinations for data
reporting elements proposed to be
unchanged or minimally revised
because the final confidentiality
determinations and reporting
determinations that the EPA made in
previous rules for these unchanged or
minimally revised data elements are
unaffected by this proposed amendment
and will continue to apply. The
minimally revised data elements are
those where we are proposing revisions
that would not require additional or
different data to be reported. For
example, we are proposing to amend 40
CFR 98.236(aa)(5)(ii) to clarify that
facilities reporting to the Underground
Natural Gas Storage industry segment
must report the quantity of natural gas
withdrawn from storage and sent to sale
in the calendar year. As discussed in
section III.U of this preamble, we are
proposing several text edits to include
‘‘natural’’ before each instance of ‘‘gas’’
and to use the phrase ‘‘sent to sale’’ for
consistency with CAA section 136
language. This proposed change is for
consistency in language and would not
affect the data collected or the
interpretation of the terms, and
therefore we are not proposing a new or
revised confidentiality determination.
However, we are soliciting comment on
any cases where a minor revision would
affect the previous confidentiality
determination or reporting
determination. In your comments,
please identify the specific data
element, including name and citation,
and explain why the minor revision
would affect the previous
confidentiality determination or
reporting determination.
VI. Impacts of the Proposed
Amendments
The proposed revisions would amend
requirements that apply to the
petroleum and natural gas systems
source category of the Greenhouse Gas
Reporting Rule consistent with CAA
section 136(h) to ensure that reporting
under subpart W is based on empirical
data and accurately reflects total CH4
emissions and waste emissions from
applicable facilities, and to allow
owners and operators of applicable
facilities to submit empirical emissions
data that appropriately could
demonstrate the extent to which a
charge is owed in future
implementation of CAA section 136.
These proposed revisions include
improving the existing calculation,
recordkeeping, and reporting
requirements. The EPA is proposing
amendments to part 98 in order to
implement improvements to the
GHGRP, including revisions to update
existing emission factors and emissions
estimation methodologies, revisions to
require reporting of additional data for
new emission sources and address
potential gaps in reporting, and
revisions to collect data that would
improve the EPA’s understanding of the
sector-specific processes or other factors
that influence GHG emission rates,
verification of collected data, or to
complement or inform other EPA
programs. The EPA is also proposing
revisions that would improve
implementation of the program, such as
those that would update applicability
estimation methodologies, provide
flexibility for or simplifying calculation
and monitoring methodologies,
streamline recordkeeping and reporting,
and other minor technical corrections or
clarifications identified as a result of
working with the affected sources
during rule implementation and
outreach. The EPA anticipates that the
proposed revisions to improve accuracy
of reporting would increase costs for
reporters. To the extent consideration of
costs is relevant to the EPA’s proposal
for meeting its obligation under CAA
section 136(h), these anticipated costs
are reasonable.
As discussed in section V of this
preamble, we are proposing to
implement these changes beginning in
RY2025. Costs have been estimated over
the three years following the year of
implementation. The incremental
implementation costs for each reporting
year are summarized in Table 6 of this
preamble. The estimated annual average
labor burden is $41.4 million per year
and the annual average labor burden per
reporter is $13,500. The incremental
burden for subpart W and the
incremental costs per reporter are
shown in Table 6 of this preamble.
TABLE 6—TOTAL INCREMENTAL LABOR BURDEN FOR REPORTING YEARS 2025–2027
[$2021/year]
Cost summary
RY2025
RY2026
RY2027
Burden by Year ............................................
Number of Reporters ....................................
Incremental Labor Cost per Reporter ..........
$41.4 million ...............
3,077 ...........................
$13,500 .......................
$41.4 million ...............
3,077 ...........................
$13,500 .......................
$41.4 million ...............
3,077 ...........................
$13,500 .......................
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
There is an additional annualized
incremental burden of $50.9 million for
capital and operation and maintenance
(O&M) costs, which reflects changes to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
applicability and monitoring. Including
capital and O&M costs, the total annual
average burden is $92.3 million over the
next 3 years.
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Annual
average
$41.4 million.
3,077.
$13,500.
The total incremental burden and
burden by reporter per subpart W
industry segment are shown in Table 7
of this preamble.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50370
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 7—TOTAL INCREMENTAL BURDEN BY INDUSTRY SEGMENT AND BY REPORTER
[$2021/year] a
Count of
reporters b
Industry segment
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production ..................................................................
Offshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production ..................................................................
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting ..................................................
Onshore Natural Gas Processing ......................
Onshore Natural Gas Transmission Compression .................................................................
Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline ...................
Underground Natural Gas Storage ....................
LNG Import and Export Equipment ...................
LNG Storage ......................................................
Natural Gas Distribution .....................................
Total ............................................................
Capital and O&M
(annualized)
Labor costs c
Total annual cost
Total annual
cost per
reporter
777
$27,957,105
$36,301,841
$64,258,946
$82,701
141
3,793
0
3,793
27
361
515
1,490,222
8,768,994
4,013,157
3,936,094
5,503,379
12,705,088
15,245
24,670
1,008
53
68
11
7
164
2,755,614
87,596
167,324
4,605
14,714
163,069
6,028,399
187
417,348
18,649
20,953
161,370
8,784,013
87,783
584,673
23,254
35,667
324,439
8,714
1,656
8,598
2,114
5,095
1,978
3,077
41,413,037
50,897,998
92,311,035
30,000
a Includes
estimated increase in costs following implementation of revisions in RY2025.
are based on GHGRP data reported in RY2020 and 567 new facilities, as detailed in the memorandum, Assessment of Burden Impacts for Proposed Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule Revisions for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems.
c Initial year and subsequent year labor costs are $41.4 million per year.
b Counts
A full discussion of the cost and
emission impacts may be found in the
memorandum, Assessment of Burden
Impacts for Proposed Greenhouse Gas
Reporting Rule Revisions for Petroleum
and Natural Gas Systems available in
the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234. The
EPA is requesting comment on the
assumptions and methodology used in
this memorandum.
The national costs of the proposed
rule reflect the fact that there are a large
number of affected entities, but per
entity costs are low. To further assess
the economic impacts of the proposed
rule, the EPA conducted a screening
analysis comparing the estimated total
annualized compliance costs for the
petroleum and natural gas systems
industry segments with industry mean
cost-to-revenue ratios based on the total
facility costs that are applicable to
parent entities in each segment. This
analysis shows that the per-entity
impacts within each industry segment
are low. These low mean cost-torevenue ratios indicate that the
proposed rule is unlikely to result in
significant changes in parent entity
production decisions or other choices
that would result in significant
fluctuations in prices or quantities in
affected markets.
TABLE 8—MEAN CRRS FOR PARENT ENTITIES BY INDUSTRY SEGMENT, ALL BUSINESS SIZES
Mean CRR
(standard error)
Industry segment
Onshore petroleum and natural gas production ..................................................................................................................
Offshore petroleum and natural gas production ..................................................................................................................
Onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting .............................................................................................
Onshore natural gas processing .........................................................................................................................................
Onshore natural gas transmission compression .................................................................................................................
Onshore natural gas transmission pipeline .........................................................................................................................
Underground natural gas storage ........................................................................................................................................
LNG import and export equipment ......................................................................................................................................
LNG storage ........................................................................................................................................................................
Natural gas distribution ........................................................................................................................................................
All segments ........................................................................................................................................................................
0.87%
0.06%
0.41%
0.50%
0.09%
0.07%
0.07%
0.01%
0.00%
0.08%
0.60%
(0.81–0.92%)
(0.04–0.09%)
(0.33–0.48%)
(0.37–0.63%)
(0.06–0.12%)
(0.05–0.10%)
(0.05–0.09%)
(0.00–0.01%)
(0.00–0.00%)
(0.05–0.10%)
(0.55–0.64%)
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
CRR = cost-to-revenue ratio.
The EPA also evaluated the mean
costs to individual facilities and mean
costs to parents (accounting for multiple
owned facilities) for reporters (shown in
Table 9 of this preamble), which are
relatively small given the high revenues
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
of parent companies within the
petroleum and natural gas systems
sector. There are currently 2,322
existing facilities reporting to subpart W
that are owned by approximately 600
parent entities. Based on a review of
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
revenue data available for
approximately 585 parent entities, the
proposed rule costs represent less than
one percent of the total annual revenue
for entities that would be reporting
under subpart W.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
50371
TABLE 9—ESTIMATED MEAN COSTS AND REVENUES FOR FACILITY AND PARENT ENTITIES, ALL SEGMENTS
Estimated values
(95% confidence interval)
Metric
Mean cost to parent entity per facility (thousands) ..................................................
Mean number of facilities owned per parent ............................................................
Mean cost to parent for all associated facilities (thousands) ...................................
Mean parent entity revenue (billions) .......................................................................
Total revenue for all subpart W parents (trillions) ....................................................
Mean CRR for parent entities, using all facility costs ...............................................
$21.7 ($21.5–$21.8).
4.9 (4.4–5.4).
$105.7 ($100.8–$110.7).
$5.18 ($4.59–$5.77).
$3.89 ($3.45–$4.33).
0.60% (0.55–0.64%).
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Note: Because parent revenues are heavily skewed towards higher revenues, the ratio of mean cost to mean revenue (which is approximately
0.002%) differs substantially from the mean cost-to-revenue ratio (which is approximately 0.60%).
The EPA has also considered the
potential benefits of the proposed
amendments to subpart W. Because this
is a proposed reporting rule, the EPA
did not quantify estimated emission
reductions or monetize the benefits from
such reductions that could be associated
with this proposed action. The benefits
of the proposed amendments are based
on their relevance to policy making,
transparency, and market efficiency.
The proposed amendments to the
reporting system for petroleum and
natural gas systems would benefit
policymakers and the public by
increasing the completeness and
accuracy of facility emissions data.
Public data on emissions allows for
accountability of emitters to the public.
Improved facility-specific emissions
data would aid local, state, and national
policymakers as they evaluate and
consider future climate change policy
decisions and other policy decisions for
criteria pollutants, ambient air quality
standards, and toxic air emissions. The
benefits of improved reporting of
petroleum and natural gas systems GHG
emissions to government also include
enhancing existing programs, such as
the Natural Gas STAR Program, that
provide significant benefits, such as
identifying cost-effective technologies
and practices to reduce emissions of
CH4 from operations in all of the major
industry sectors—production, gathering
and processing, transmission, and
distribution. The Natural Gas STAR
program leverages GHGRP reporting
data to track partner petroleum and
natural gas company activities related to
their Methane Challenge commitments.
The proposed changes to subpart W
would increase knowledge of the
location and magnitude of significant
CH4 emissions sources in the petroleum
and natural gas industry, and associated
activities and technologies, which can
result in improvements in technologies
and the identification of new emissions
reducing technologies.
Benefits to industry of improved GHG
emissions monitoring and reporting
under the proposed amendments
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
include the value of having verifiable
empirical data to present to the public
to demonstrate appropriate
environmental stewardship, and a better
understanding of their emission levels
and sources to identify opportunities to
reduce emissions. The EPA also
anticipates that improvements to
monitoring and implementation of
empirical measurement methods would
result in emissions reductions. Based on
activity data used to inform the U.S.
GHG Inventory, the EPA estimated
approximately 403.4 billion cubic feet of
fugitive CH4 emissions (including
fugitive leaks, venting, and flaring) in
2021, representing a potential loss of
over $871 million 134 to industry. To the
extent that more frequent monitoring
helps to identify and mitigate emissions
from leakage, a robust reporting program
based on empirical data can help
industry and achieve and disseminate
their environmental achievements.
Businesses and other innovators can use
the data to determine and track their
GHG footprints, find cost-saving
efficiencies that reduce GHG emissions
and save product, and foster
technologies to protect public health
and the environment. to reduce costs
associated with fugitive emissions. Such
monitoring also allows for inclusion of
standardized GHG data into
environmental management systems,
providing the necessary information to
track actual company performance and
to achieve and disseminate their
environmental achievements. Once
facilities invest in the institutional
knowledge and systems to monitor and
report emissions, the cost of monitoring
should fall and the accuracy of the
accounting should continue to improve.
The proposed amendments would
continue to allow for facilities to
benchmark themselves against similar
facilities to understand better their
relative standing within their industry
and achieve and disseminate
134 Based on natural gas prices from EIA (current
monthly average, April 2023). See https://
www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/rngwhhdm.htm.
PO 00000
Frm 00091
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
information about their environmental
performance.
In addition, transparent public data
on emissions allows for accountability
of polluters to the public who bear the
cost of the pollution. The GHGRP serves
as a powerful data resource and
provides a critical tool for communities
to identify nearby sources of GHGs and
provide information to state and local
governments. GHGRP data are easily
accessible to the public via the EPA’s
online data publication tool, also known
as FLIGHT (Facility Level Information
on Greenhouse gases Tool) at: https://
ghgdata.epa.gov/ghgp/main.do. FLIGHT
is designed for the general public and
allows users to view and sort GHG data
from over 8,000 entities in a variety of
ways including by location, industrial
sector, and type of GHG emitted, and
includes demographic data. Although
the emissions reported to the EPA by
reporting facilities are global pollutants,
many of these facilities also release
pollutants that have a more direct and
local impact in the surrounding
communities. Citizens, community
groups, and labor unions have made use
of public pollutant release data to
negotiate directly with emitters to lower
emissions, avoiding the need for
additional regulatory action.
The proposed amendments would
improve the quality and transparency of
this reported data to affected
communities, for example, by providing
data on other large release events. The
proposed disaggregation of reporting
requirements within the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production
and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting industry
segments to at least the well-pad and
gathering boosting site-level,
respectively, would provide
communities with more localized
information on GHG emissions from
these segments. Therefore, while the
EPA has not quantified the benefits of
the proposed amendments to subpart W,
the agency believes that they would be
substantial and justify the estimated
costs, if finalized as proposed. In
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50372
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
addition, the focus on empirical data
that is the foundation of this proposed
rule was mandated by Congress in the
IRA.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
This action is a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ as defined in Executive Order
12866, as amended by Executive Order
14094. Accordingly, the EPA submitted
this action to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for Executive Order
12866 review. Documentation of any
changes made in response to the
Executive Order 12866 review is
available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2023–0234. The EPA prepared an
analysis of the potential impacts
associated with this action. This
analysis, Assessment of Burden Impacts
for Proposed Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Rule Revisions for Petroleum and
Natural Gas Systems, is also available in
the docket to this rulemaking and is
briefly summarized in section VI of this
preamble.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection activities
in this proposed rule have been
submitted for approval to the OMB
under the PRA. The ICR document that
the EPA prepared has been assigned
OMB No. 2060–NEW (EPA ICR number
2774.01). You can find a copy of the ICR
in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–
0234, and it is briefly summarized here.
The EPA estimates that the proposed
amendments would result in an increase
in burden. The burden associated with
the proposed rule is due to revisions
that would expand reporting to include
new emission sources or that expand
the industry segments covered by
existing emissions sources and that may
impact the facilities that are required to
report to subpart W; revisions to
emissions calculation methodologies
that would require additional
monitoring; and revisions to collect
additional data to more accurately
reflect and verify total CH4 emissions in
reports submitted to the GHGRP or to
provide information for future
implementation of the waste emissions
charge under CAA section 136. As a
result of these proposed revisions, 567
new sources are expected to become
subject to subpart W. Labor and O&M
costs are included for those new sources
to comply with the reporting and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
recordkeeping costs detailed in EPA ICR
No. 2300.18, as well as costs to comply
with these proposed revisions.
The estimated annual average burden
is 417,821 hours and $92.3 million over
the 3 years covered by this information
collection. Further information on the
EPA’s assessment on the impact on
burden can be found in the
memorandum, Assessment of Burden
Impacts for Proposed Greenhouse Gas
Reporting Rule Revisions for Petroleum
and Natural Gas Systems, in the docket
for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No.
EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234.
Respondents/affected entities:
Owners and operators of petroleum and
natural gas systems that must report
their GHG emissions and other data to
the EPA to comply with 40 CFR part 98.
Respondent’s obligation to respond:
The respondent’s obligation to respond
is mandatory under the authority
provided in CAA sections 114 and 136.
Estimated number of respondents:
3,077 (affected by proposed
amendments).
Frequency of response: Annually.
Total estimated burden: 417,821
hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5
CFR 1320.3(b).
Total estimated cost: $92.3 million,
includes $50.9 million annualized
capital or operation & maintenance
costs.
An Agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. The OMB control
numbers for the EPA’s regulations in 40
CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
Submit your comments on the
Agency’s need for this information, the
accuracy of the provided burden
estimates and any suggested methods
for minimizing respondent burden to
the EPA using the docket identified at
the beginning of this rulemaking. You
may also send your ICR-related
comments to OMB’s Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs
using the interface at https://
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.
Find this particular information
collection by selecting ‘‘Currently under
Review—Open for Public Comments’’ or
by using the search function. OMB must
receive comments no later than October
2, 2023. The EPA will respond to any
ICR-related comments in the final rule.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this proposed action
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities under the RFA. The small
entities subject to the requirements of
this action are small businesses in the
PO 00000
Frm 00092
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
petroleum and natural gas industry.
Small entities include small businesses,
small organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions. The EPA
has determined that some small entities
are affected because their production
processes emit GHGs that must be
reported.
In the implementation of the GHGRP,
the EPA previously determined
thresholds that reduced the number of
small businesses reporting. The
proposed revisions would not revise the
threshold for existing subpart W
reporters, therefore, we do not expect a
significant number of small entities
would be newly impacted under the
proposed rule revisions.
The proposed rule amendments
predominantly apply to existing
reporters and are amendments that
would expand reporting to include new
emission sources; add, remove, or refine
emissions estimation methodologies to
improve the accuracy and transparency
of reported emission data; for the
Onshore Natural Gas Production and
Onshore Natural Gas Gathering and
Boosting segments, revise reporting of
emissions from a basin level to a site
level; implement requirements to collect
new or revised data; clarify or update
provisions that have been
misinterpreted; or streamline or
simplify requirements by increasing
flexibility for reporters or removing
redundant requirements.
The EPA conducted a small entity
analysis that assessed the costs and
impacts to small entities, including: (1)
Revisions to add new emissions sources
and expand the industry segments
covered by existing emissions sources,
(2) changes to improve existing
monitoring or calculation
methodologies, and (3) revisions to
reporting and recordkeeping
requirements for data provided to the
program. The Agency anticipates that
although a subset of small reporters
(108–116) have a cost-to-revenue ratio
(CRR) >1%, there are only a limited
number (29–30) of very small entities
(1–19 employees) that would be likely
to have significant impacts with CRR
>3%, reflecting only a small proportion
of the affected small entities (2.0%–
5.2%). The mean CRR for these very
small entities (1–19 employees) is
estimated to be between 1.55% (1.46–
1.64%) and 2.06% (1.77–2.34%) based
on the incremental costs for existing
reporting entities and between 2.35%
(2.16–2.55%) and 3.12% (2.59–3.66%)
based on the costs for newly reporting
entities.135 Details of this analysis are
135 The EPA conducted a multi-level analysis to
estimate mean CRRs for multiple scenarios. The
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
presented in the memorandum,
Assessment of Burden Impacts for
Proposed Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Rule Revisions for Petroleum and
Natural Gas Systems, available in the
docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id.
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2023–0234. Based
on the results of this analysis, we have
concluded that this proposed action is
not likely to have a significant
regulatory burden for a substantial
number of directly regulated small
entities and thus that this proposed
action would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The EPA
continues to conduct significant
outreach on the GHGRP and maintains
an ‘‘open door’’ policy for stakeholders
to help inform the EPA’s understanding
of key issues for the industries. We
continue to be interested in the
potential impacts of the proposed rule
amendments on small entities and
welcome comments on issues related to
such impacts.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
This action does not contain an
unfunded mandate of $100 million or
more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C.
1531–1538, and does not significantly or
uniquely affect small governments. The
action in part implements mandate(s)
specifically and explicitly set forth in
CAA section 136.
This proposed rule does not apply to
governmental entities unless the
government entity owns a facility in the
petroleum and gas industry that directly
emits GHG above part 98 applicability
threshold levels. It does not impose any
implementation responsibilities on
state, local, or tribal governments and it
is not expected to increase the cost of
existing regulatory programs managed
by those governments. Thus, the impact
on governments affected by the
proposed rule is expected to be
minimal.
However, consistent with the EPA’s
policy to promote communications
between the EPA and state and local
governments, the EPA sought comments
from small governments concerning the
regulatory requirements that might
significantly or uniquely affect them in
the development of this proposed rule.
Specifically, the EPA previously
published an RFI seeking public
comment in a non-regulatory docket to
collect responses to a range of questions
related to the Methane Emissions
mean CRR and associated 95-percent confidence
intervals provide an estimate of the range of costto-sales ratios expected to apply to affected very
small entities that would be expected in the total
population.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
Reduction Program, including subpart
W revisions (see Docket Id. No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2022–0875). The EPA
received two comments from
government entities supporting the use
of empirical data and improvements to
the accuracy of calculation methods
under subpart W; these comments were
considered during the development of
the proposed rule. The EPA continues to
be interested in the potential impacts of
the proposed rule amendments on state,
local, or tribal governments and
welcomes comments on issues related to
such impacts.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism
implications. It will not have substantial
direct effects on the states, on the
relationship between the national
government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. This proposed
rule does not apply to governmental
entities unless the government entity
owns a facility in the petroleum and gas
industry (e.g., an LDC) that directly
emits GHG above part 98 applicability
threshold levels. Therefore, the EPA
anticipates relatively few state or local
government facilities would be affected.
However, consistent with the EPA’s
policy to promote communications
between the EPA and state and local
governments, the EPA specifically
solicits comment on this proposed
action from state and local officials.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action has tribal implications.
However, it will neither impose
substantial direct compliance costs on
federally recognized Tribal
governments, nor preempt tribal law.
This regulation will apply directly to
petroleum and natural gas facilities that
may be owned by tribal governments
that emit GHGs. However, it will
generally only have tribal implications
where the tribal entity owns a facility
that directly emits GHGs above
threshold levels; therefore, relatively
few tribal facilities would be affected.
Of the subpart W facilities currently
reporting to the GHGRP in RY2021, we
identified four facilities currently
reporting to part 98 that are owned by
one tribal parent company.
In addition to tribes that would be
directly impacted by the proposed
revisions due to owning a facility
subject to the proposed requirements,
the EPA anticipates that tribes could be
impacted in cases where facilities
subject to the proposed revisions are
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50373
located on Tribal land. In particular, the
EPA reviewed the location of the
production wells reported by facilities
under the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production segment and
found production wells reported under
subpart W on lands associated with
approximately 20 tribes. Therefore,
although the EPA anticipates that only
one tribe would be subject to the rule,
the EPA has sought opportunities to
provide information to tribal
governments and representatives during
rule development. On November 4,
2022, the EPA published an RFI seeking
public comment on a range of questions
related to the Methane Emissions
Reduction Program, including subpart
W revisions (see Docket Id. No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2022–0875). The EPA
received one comment from a tribal
entity relevant to subpart W. The
commenter supported the use of
empirical data and improvements to the
accuracy of calculation methods under
subpart W, including the use of
advanced CH4 detection technologies for
leak surveys at well sites and
compressor stations; these comments
were considered during the
development of the proposed rule.
Further, consistent with the EPA Policy
on Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribes, the EPA will engage in
consultation with Tribal officials during
the development of this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order
13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern
environmental health or safety risks that
the EPA has reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, per
the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory
action’’ in section 2–202 of the
Executive order. This action is not
subject to Executive Order 13045
because it does not concern an
environmental health risk or safety risk.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This action is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ because it is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution or use of energy.
The proposed amendments would
expand reporting to include new
emission sources; add, remove, or refine
emissions estimation methodologies
improve the accuracy and transparency
of reported emission data; for the
Onshore Natural Gas Production and
Onshore Natural Gas Gathering and
Boosting segments, revise reporting of
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50374
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
emissions from a basin level to a site
level; implement requirements to collect
new or revised data; clarify or update
provisions that have been
misinterpreted; or streamline or
simplify requirements by increasing
flexibility for reporters or removing
redundant requirements. We are also
proposing revisions that streamline or
simplify requirements or alleviate
burden through revision, simplification,
or removal of certain calculation,
monitoring, recordkeeping, or reporting
requirements. In general, these changes
would not have a significant, adverse
effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. In addition, the EPA is
proposing confidentiality
determinations for new and revised data
elements proposed in this rulemaking
and for certain existing data elements
for which a confidentiality
determination has not previously been
proposed. These proposed amendments
and confidentiality determinations do
not make any changes to the existing
monitoring, calculation, and reporting
requirements under subpart W and are
not likely to have a significant adverse
effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act and 1 CFR Part 51
This action involves technical
standards. For facilities that conduct a
performance test to calculate
combustion slip, the EPA is proposing
that the performance test would be
conducted in accordance with one of
the test methods in proposed 40 CFR
98.234(i), which include EPA Methods
18 and 320 as well as an alternate
method, ASTM D6348–12. The EPA is
proposing to allow the use of the
alternate method ASTM D6348–12,
which is based on the use of a Fourier
transform infrared (FTIR) spectrometer
for the identification and quantification
of multicomponent gaseous compounds,
in lieu of EPA Method 320. The EPA
currently allows for the use of an earlier
version of this method, ASTM D6348–
03, under other subparts of part 98,
including subparts I (Electronics
Manufacturing), V (Nitric Acid
Production), and OO (Fluorinated Gas
Production), for the quantification of
other GHGs. Therefore, the EPA is
proposing to allow ASTM D6348–12 to
be used in subpart W to quantify CH4
emissions from combustion slip.
Anyone may access the standards on the
ASTM website (https://www.astm.org/)
for additional information. These
standards are available to everyone at a
cost determined by the ASTM ($76).
The ASTM also offers memberships or
subscriptions that allow unlimited
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
access to their methods. The cost of
obtaining these methods is not a
significant financial burden, making the
methods reasonably available for
reporters. The EPA will also make a
copy of these documents available in
hard copy at the appropriate EPA office
(see the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this preamble for
more information) for review purposes
only.
pad and gathering boosting site-level,
respectively, and the required reporting
of geographical coordinates for other
large release events would provide
communities with more localized
information on GHG emissions from
these segments.
Overall, these revisions would
improve the quality of the data collected
under the program and available to
communities, if finalized.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
The EPA anticipates that the human
health or environmental risk addressed
by this action will not have potential
disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects
on minority, low-income or indigenous
populations as it does not directly affect
the level of protection provided to
human health or the environment
because it is a rule addressing
information collection and reporting
procedures.
However, the data that would be
collected through this action would
provide an important data resource for
communities and the public to
understand GHG emissions. Since
facilities would be required to use
prescribed calculation and monitoring
methods, emissions data can be
compared and analyzed, including
locations of emissions sources. GHGRP
data are easily accessible to the public
via the EPA’s online data publication
tool, also known as FLIGHT at: https://
ghgdata.epa.gov/ghgp/main.do. FLIGHT
is designed for the general public and
allows users to view and sort GHG data
for every reporting year starting with
2010 from over 8,000 entities in a
variety of ways including by location,
industrial sector, and type of GHG
emitted. This powerful data resource
provides a critical tool for communities
to identify nearby sources of GHGs and
provide information to state and local
governments.
The proposed revisions to part 98
include requirements for reporting of
GHG data from additional emission
sources (other large release events,
nitrogen removal units, produced water
tanks, crankcase venting, and mud
degassing), improvements to emissions
calculation methodologies, and
collection of data to support verification
of GHG emissions and transparency.
The proposed disaggregation of
reporting requirements within the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production and Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segments to at least the well-
K. Determination Under CAA Section
307(d)
Pursuant to CAA section 307(d)(1)(V),
the Administrator determines that this
action is subject to the provisions of
CAA section 307(d). Section
307(d)(1)(V) of the CAA provides that
the provisions of CAA section 307(d)
apply to ‘‘such other actions as the
Administrator may determine.’’
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 98
Environmental protection,
Greenhouse gases, Incorporation by
reference, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Michael S. Regan,
Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the Environmental Protection
Agency proposes to amend title 40,
chapter I, of the Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:
PART 98—MANDATORY
GREENHOUSE GAS REPORTING
1. The authority citation for part 98
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.
Subpart A—General Provision
2. Amend § 98.1 by revising paragraph
(c) to read as follows:
■
§ 98.1
Purpose and scope.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) For facilities required to report
under onshore petroleum and natural
gas production under subpart W of this
part, the terms Owner and Operator
used in this subpart have the same
definition as Onshore petroleum and
natural gas production owner or
operator, as defined in § 98.238. For
facilities required to report under
onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting under subpart W
of this part, the terms Owner and
Operator used in this subpart have the
same definition as Gathering and
boosting system owner or operator, as
defined in § 98.238. For facilities
required to report under onshore natural
gas transmission pipeline under subpart
W of this part, the terms Owner and
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
Operator used in this subpart have the
same definition as Onshore natural gas
transmission pipeline owner or
operator, as defined in § 98.238.
■ 3. Amend § 98.2 by revising paragraph
(i)(3) to read as follows:
emitting processes or operations resume
operation.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 4. Amend § 98.4 by revising the first
sentence of paragraph (h) and adding
paragraph (n) to read as follows:
§ 98.2
§ 98.4 Authorization and responsibilities of
the designated representative.
Who must report?
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
*
*
*
*
*
(i) * * *
(3) If the operations of a facility or
supplier are changed such that all
applicable processes and operations
subject to paragraphs (a)(1) through (4)
of this section cease to operate, then the
owner or operator may discontinue
complying with this part for the
reporting years following the year in
which cessation of such operations
occurs, provided that the owner or
operator submits a notification to the
Administrator that announces the
cessation of reporting and certifies to
the closure of all applicable processes
and operations no later than March 31
of the year following such changes. If
one or more processes or operations
subject to paragraphs (a)(1) through (4)
of this section at a facility or supplier
cease to operate, but not all applicable
processes or operations cease to operate,
then the owner or operator is exempt
from reporting for any such processes or
operations in the reporting years
following the reporting year in which
cessation of the process or operation
occurs, provided that the owner or
operator submits a notification to the
Administrator that announces the
cessation of reporting for the process or
operation no later than March 31
following the first reporting year in
which the process or operation has
ceased for an entire reporting year.
Cessation of operations in the context of
underground coal mines includes, but is
not limited to, abandoning and sealing
the facility. This paragraph (i)(3) does
not apply to seasonal or other temporary
cessation of operations. This paragraph
(i)(3) does not apply to the municipal
solid waste landfills source category
(subpart HH of this part), or the
industrial waste landfills source
category (subpart TT of this part). This
paragraph (i)(3) does not apply when
there is a change in the owner or
operator for facilities in industry
segments with a unique definition of
facility as defined in § 98.238 of the
petroleum and natural gas systems
source category (subpart W of this part),
unless the changes result in permanent
cessation of all applicable processes and
operations. The owner or operator must
resume reporting for any future calendar
year during which any of the GHG-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
*
*
*
*
*
(h) Changes in owners and operators.
Except as provided in paragraph (n) of
this section, in the event an owner or
operator of the facility or supplier is not
included in the list of owners and
operators in the certificate of
representation under this section for the
facility or supplier, such owner or
operator shall be deemed to be subject
to and bound by the certificate of
representation, the representations,
actions, inactions, and submissions of
the designated representative and any
alternate designated representative of
the facility or supplier, as if the owner
or operator were included in such list.
* * *
*
*
*
*
*
(n) Alternative provisions for changes
in owners and operators for industry
segments with a unique definition of
facility as defined in § 98.238. When
there is a change to the owner or
operator of a facility required to report
under the onshore petroleum and
natural gas production, natural gas
distribution, onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting, or
onshore natural gas transmission
pipeline industry segments of subpart W
of this part, or a change to the owner or
operator for some emission sources from
the facility in one of these industry
segments, the provisions specified in
paragraphs (n)(1) through (4) of this
section apply for the respective type of
change in owner or operator. The
provisions specified in paragraph (n)(5)
of this section apply to the types of
change in owner or operator specified in
paragraphs (n)(3) and (4) of this section.
(1) If the entire facility is acquired by
an owner or operator that does not
already have a reporting facility in the
same industry segment and basin (for
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production or onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting) or
state (for natural gas distribution), then
within 90 days after the change in the
owner or operator, the designated
representative or any alternate
designated representative shall submit a
certificate of representation that is
complete under this section. If the new
owner or operator already had emission
sources specified in § 98.232(c), (i), (j) or
(m), as applicable, prior to the
acquisition in the same basin (for
PO 00000
Frm 00095
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50375
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production or onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting) or
state (for natural gas distribution) as the
acquired facility but had not previously
met the applicability requirements in
§§ 98.2(a) and 98.231, then per the
applicable definition of facility in
§ 98.238, the previously owned
applicable emission sources must be
included in the acquired facility. The
new owner or operator and the new
designated representative shall be
responsible for submitting the annual
report for the facility for the entire
reporting year beginning with the
reporting year in which the acquisition
occurred. The new owner or operator
and the new designated representative
shall also be responsible for submitting
any required annual GHG report
revisions required by § 98.3(h) for
reporting years prior to the reporting
year in which the acquisition occurred.
(2) If the entire facility is acquired by
an owner or operator that already has a
reporting facility in the same industry
segment and basin (for onshore
petroleum and natural gas production or
onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting) or state (for
natural gas distribution), the new owner
or operator shall merge the acquired
facility with their existing facility for
purposes of the annual GHG report.
Within 90 days after the change in the
owner or operator, the designated
representative or any alternate
designated representative shall submit a
certificate of representation that is
complete under this section to reflect
the new owner or operator for the
acquired facility. The owner or operator
shall also follow the provisions of
§ 98.2(i)(6) to notify EPA that the
acquired facility will discontinue
reporting and shall provide the e-GGRT
identification number of the merged, or
reconstituted, facility. The owner or
operator of the merged facility shall be
responsible for submitting the annual
report for the merged facility for the
entire reporting year beginning with the
reporting year in which the acquisition
occurred. The new owner or operator
and the new designated representative
shall also be responsible for submitting
any required annual GHG report
revisions required by § 98.3(h) for
reporting years prior to the reporting
year in which the acquisition occurred.
(3) If only some emission sources
from the facility are acquired by one or
more new owners or operators, the
existing owner or operator (i.e., the
owner or operator of the portion of the
facility that is not sold) shall continue
to report under subpart W of this part
for the retained emission sources unless
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50376
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
and until that facility meets one of the
criteria in § 98.2(i). Each owner or
operator that acquires emission sources
from the facility must account for those
acquired emission sources according to
paragraph (n)(3)(i) or (ii) of this section,
as applicable.
(i) If the purchasing owner or operator
that acquires only some of the emission
sources from the existing facility does
not already have a reporting facility in
the same industry segment and basin
(for onshore petroleum and natural gas
production or onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting) or
state (for natural gas distribution), the
purchasing owner or operator shall
begin reporting as a new facility. The
new facility must include the acquired
emission sources specified in
§ 98.232(c), (i), (j), or (m), as applicable,
and any emission sources the
purchasing owner or operator already
owned in the same industry segment
and basin (for onshore petroleum and
natural gas production or onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting) or state (for natural gas
distribution). The designated
representative for the new facility must
be selected by the purchasing owner or
operator according to the schedule and
procedure specified in paragraphs (b)
through (d) of this section. The
purchasing owner or operator shall be
responsible for submitting the annual
report for the new facility for the entire
reporting year beginning with the
reporting year in which the acquisition
occurred. The purchasing owner or
operator shall continue to report under
subpart W of this part for the new
facility unless and until that facility
meets one of the criteria in § 98.2(i).
(ii) If the purchasing owner or
operator that acquires only some of the
emission sources from the existing
facility already has a reporting facility
in the same industry segment and basin
(for onshore petroleum and natural gas
production or onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting) or
state (for natural gas distribution), then
per the applicable definition of facility
in § 98.238, the purchasing owner or
operator must add the acquired
emission sources specified in
§ 98.232(c), (i), (j), or (m), as applicable,
to their existing facility for purposes of
reporting under subpart W. The
purchasing owner or operator shall be
responsible for submitting the annual
report for the entire facility, including
the acquired emission sources, for the
entire reporting year beginning with the
reporting year in which the acquisition
occurred.
(4) If all the emission sources from a
reporting facility are sold to multiple
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
owners or operators within the same
reporting year, such that the current
owner or operator of the existing facility
does not retain any of the emission
sources, then the current owner or
operator of the existing facility shall
notify EPA within 90 days of the last
transaction that all of the facility’s
emission sources were acquired by
multiple purchasers, including the
identity of the purchasers. Each owner
or operator that acquires emission
sources from a facility shall account for
those sources according to paragraph
(n)(3)(i) or (ii) of this section, as
applicable.
(5) Within 90 days of a transaction
that results in a change to the owner or
operator of a facility as described in
paragraph (n)(3) or (4) of this section,
the owners or operators involved in that
transaction shall select a historic
reporting representative who will be
responsible for revisions to annual GHG
reports under § 98.3(h) for reporting
years prior to the reporting year in
which the transaction occurred. The
historic reporting representative shall be
an individual selected by an agreement
binding on each of the owners and
operators involved in the transaction,
following the provisions of paragraph
(b) of this section. The provisions of
paragraphs (b), (c), (e), and (g) of this
section apply to the historic reporting
representative by substituting the term
‘‘historic reporting representative’’ for
‘‘designated representative.’’ The
provisions of paragraph (i) of this
section apply to the historic reporting
representative by adding the term
‘‘historic reporting representative’’ to
instances of ‘‘the designated
representative and any alternate
designated representative.’’
■ 5. Amend § 98.6 by revising the
definitions for ‘‘Dehydrator’’,
‘‘Dehydrator vent emissions’’,
‘‘Desiccant’’, and ‘‘Vapor recovery
system’’ to read as follows:
§ 98.6
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Dehydrator means a device in which
a liquid absorbent (including ethylene
glycol, diethylene glycol, or triethylene
glycol) or desiccant directly contacts a
natural gas stream to remove water
vapor.
Dehydrator vent emissions means
natural gas and CO2 released from a
natural gas dehydrator system absorbent
(typically glycol) regenerator still vent
and, if present, a flash tank separator, to
the atmosphere, flare, regenerator firebox/fire tubes, or vapor recovery system.
Emissions include stripping natural gas
PO 00000
Frm 00096
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
and motive natural gas used in
absorbent circulation pumps.
*
*
*
*
*
Desiccant means a material used in
solid-bed dehydrators to remove water
from raw natural gas by adsorption or
absorption. Desiccants include, but are
not limited to, molecular sieves,
activated alumina, pelletized calcium
chloride, lithium chloride and granular
silica gel material. Wet natural gas is
passed through a bed of the granular or
pelletized solid adsorbent or absorbent
in these dehydrators. As the wet gas
contacts the surface of the particles of
desiccant material, water is adsorbed on
the surface or absorbed and dissolves
the surface of these desiccant particles.
Passing through the entire desiccant
bed, almost all of the water is adsorbed
onto or absorbed into the desiccant
material, leaving the dry gas to exit the
contactor.
*
*
*
*
*
Vapor recovery system means any
equipment located at the source of
potential gas emissions to the
atmosphere or to a flare, that is
composed of piping, connections, and,
if necessary, flow-inducing devices, and
that is used for routing the gas back into
the process as a product and/or fuel. For
purposes of § 98.233, routing emissions
from a dehydrator regenerator still vent
or flash tank separator vent to a
regenerator fire-box/fire tubes does not
meet the definition of vapor recovery
system.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 6. Amend § 98.7 by adding paragraph
(e)(53) to read as follows:
§ 98.7 What standardized methods are
incorporated by reference into this part?
*
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(53) ASTM D6348–12 Standard Test
Method for Determination of Gaseous
Compounds by Extractive Direct
Interface Fourier Transform Infrared
(FTIR) Spectroscopy, IBR approved for
§ 98.234(j).
*
*
*
*
*
Subpart C—General Stationary Fuel
Combustion Sources
■ 7. Amend § 98.33 by revising
parameter ‘‘EF’’ of Equation C–8 in
paragraph (c)(1) introductory text,
Equation C–8a in paragraph (c)(1)(i),
Equation C–8b in paragraph (c)(1)(ii),
Equation C–9a in paragraph (c)(2), and
Equation C–10 in paragraph (c)(4)
introductory text to read as follows:
§ 98.33
*
Calculating GHG emissions.
*
*
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
*
*
50377
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
Where: * * *
EF = Fuel-specific default emission factor for
CH4 or N2O, from Table C–2 of this
subpart (kg CH4 or N2O per mmBtu),
except for natural gas-fired reciprocating
internal combustion engines and gas
turbines at facilities subject to subpart W
of this part, which must use a CH4
emission factor determined in
accordance with § 98.233(z)(4).
*
*
*
(i) * * *
*
*
Where: * * *
EF = Fuel-specific default emission factor for
CH4 or N2O, from Table C–2 of this
subpart (kg CH4 or N2O per mmBtu),
except for natural gas-fired reciprocating
internal combustion engines and gas
turbines at facilities subject to subpart W
of this part, which must use a CH4
emission factor determined in
accordance with § 98.233(z)(4).
*
*
*
(ii) * * *
*
*
Where: * * *
EF = Fuel-specific default emission factor for
CH4 or N2O, from Table C–2 of this
subpart (kg CH4 or N2O per mmBtu),
except for natural gas-fired reciprocating
internal combustion engines and gas
turbines at facilities subject to subpart W
of this part, which must use a CH4
emission factor determined in
accordance with § 98.233(z)(4).
*
*
*
(2) * * *
*
*
Where: * * *
EF = Fuel-specific default emission factor for
CH4 or N2O, from Table C–2 of this
subpart (kg CH4 or N2O per mmBtu),
except for natural gas-fired reciprocating
internal combustion engines and gas
turbines at facilities subject to subpart W
of this part, which must use a CH4
emission factor determined in
accordance with § 98.233(z)(4).
*
*
*
(4) * * *
*
*
Where: * * *
EF = Fuel-specific default emission factor for
CH4 or N2O, from Table C–2 of this
subpart (kg CH4 or N2O per mmBtu),
except for natural gas-fired reciprocating
internal combustion engines and gas
turbines at facilities subject to subpart W
of this part, which must use a CH4
emission factor determined in
accordance with § 98.233(z)(4).
*
*
*
*
*
8. Amend § 98.36 by adding
paragraphs (b)(13), (c)(1)(xiii), and
(c)(3)(xiii) to read as follows:
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
■
§ 98.36
Data reporting requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(13) For natural gas-fired
reciprocating internal combustion
engines or gas turbines at facilities
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
subject to subpart W of this part, which
must use a CH4 emission factor
determined in accordance with
§ 98.233(z)(4), you must also report:
(i) Type of equipment: two-stroke
lean-burn reciprocating internal
combustion engine, four-stroke leanburn reciprocating internal combustion
engine, four-stroke rich-burn
reciprocating internal combustion
engine, or gas turbine.
(ii) Method by which the CH4
emission factor was determined:
performance test, manufacturer data, or
default emission factor.
(iii) Value of the CH4 emission factor.
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(xiii) For natural gas-fired
reciprocating internal combustion
engines or gas turbines at facilities
subject to subpart W of this part, which
must use a CH4 emission factor
determined in accordance with
§ 98.233(z)(4), you must report the
equipment type (i.e., two-stroke leanburn reciprocating internal combustion
engine, four-stroke lean-burn
reciprocating internal combustion
engine, four-stroke rich-burn
reciprocating internal combustion
engine, and gas turbine), the method by
which the CH4 emission factor was
determined (i.e., performance test,
manufacturer data, or default emission
factor), and the average value of the CH4
emission factor.
*
*
*
*
*
(3) * * *
(xiii) For natural gas-fired
reciprocating internal combustion
engines or gas turbines at facilities
subject to subpart W of this part, which
must use a CH4 emission factor
determined in accordance with
§ 98.233(z)(4), you must report the
equipment type (i.e., two-stroke leanburn reciprocating internal combustion
engine, four-stroke lean-burn
reciprocating internal combustion
engine, four-stroke rich-burn
reciprocating internal combustion
engine, and gas turbine) the method by
which the CH4 emission factor was
determined (i.e., performance test,
manufacturer data, or default emission
factor), and the average value of the CH4
emission factor.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 9. Amend table C–2 to subpart C of
part 98 by revising the entry ‘‘Natural
Gas’’ to read as follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00097
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
TABLE C–2 TO SUBPART C OF PART
98—DEFAULT CH4 AND N2O EMISSION FACTORS FOR VARIOUS TYPES
OF FUEL
Default CH4
emission
factor
(kg CH4/
mmBtu)
Fuel type
*
*
Natural Gas 1
*
Default N2O
emission
factor (kg
N2O/mmBtu)
*
1.0 × 10¥03
*
1.0 × 10¥04.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1 Reporters subject to subpart W of this part
may only use the default CH4 emission factor
for natural gas-fired combustion units that are
not reciprocating internal combustion engines
or gas turbines. For natural gas-fired reciprocating internal combustion engines or gas turbines, at facilities subject to subpart W of this
part, reporters must use a CH4 emission factor
determined in accordance with § 98.233(z)(4).
Subpart W—Petroleum and Natural
Gas Systems
10. Amend § 98.230 by revising
paragraphs (a)(2), (3) and (9) to read as
follows:
■
§ 98.230
Definition of the source category.
(a) * * *
(2) Onshore petroleum and natural
gas production. Onshore petroleum and
natural gas production means all
equipment on a single well-pad or
associated with a single well-pad
(including but not limited to
compressors, generators, dehydrators,
storage vessels, engines, boilers, heaters,
flares, separation and processing
equipment, and portable non-selfpropelled equipment, which includes
well drilling and completion
equipment, workover equipment, and
leased, rented or contracted equipment)
used in the production, extraction,
recovery, lifting, stabilization,
separation or treating of petroleum and/
or natural gas (including condensate).
This equipment also includes associated
storage or measurement vessels, all
petroleum and natural gas production
equipment located on islands, artificial
islands, or structures connected by a
causeway to land, an island, or an
artificial island. Onshore petroleum and
natural gas production also means all
equipment on or associated with a
single enhanced oil recovery (EOR)
well-pad using CO2 or natural gas
injection.
(3) Onshore natural gas processing.
Onshore natural gas processing means
the forced extraction of natural gas
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50378
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
liquids (NGLs) from field gas,
fractionation of mixed NGLs to natural
gas products, or both. Natural gas
processing does not include a JouleThomson valve, a dew point depression
valve, or an isolated or standalone JouleThomson skid. This segment also
includes all residue gas compression
equipment owned or operated by the
natural gas processing plant.
*
*
*
*
*
(9) Onshore petroleum and natural
gas gathering and boosting. Onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting means gathering pipelines and
other equipment used to collect
petroleum and/or natural gas from
onshore production gas or oil wells and
used to compress, dehydrate, sweeten,
or transport the petroleum and/or
natural gas to a natural gas processing
facility, a natural gas transmission
pipeline or to a natural gas distribution
pipeline. Gathering and boosting
equipment includes, but is not limited
to gathering pipelines, separators,
compressors, acid gas removal units,
dehydrators, pneumatic devices/pumps,
storage vessels, engines, boilers, heaters,
and flares. Gathering and boosting
equipment does not include equipment
reported under any other industry
segment defined in this section.
Gathering pipelines operating on a
vacuum and gathering pipelines with a
GOR less than 300 standard cubic feet
per stock tank barrel (scf/STB) are not
included in this industry segment (oil
here refers to hydrocarbon liquids of all
API gravities).
*
*
*
*
*
■ 11. Amend § 98.232 by:
■ a. Revising paragraphs (a), (b) and
(c)(2), (10), (17), and (21);
■ b. Adding paragraphs (c)(23) through
(25);
■ c. Revising paragraphs (d)(5) and (7);
■ d. Adding paragraphs (d)(8) through
(11);
■ e. Revising paragraphs (e)(3) and (8);
■ f. Adding paragraphs (e)(9) through
(11);
■ g. Revising paragraphs (f)(6) and (8);
■ h. Adding paragraphs (f)(9) through
(13);
■ i. Revising paragraphs (g)(6) and (7);
■ j. Adding paragraphs (g)(8) through
(11);
■ k. Revising paragraphs (h)(7) and (8);
■ l. Adding paragraphs (h)(9) through
(11) and (i)(8) through (11);
■ m. Revising paragraphs (j)(3), (6), and
(10);
■ n. Adding paragraphs (j)(13) and (14);
■ o. Revising paragraph (m); and
■ p. Adding paragraph (n).
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
§ 98.232
GHGs to report.
(a) You must report CO2, CH4, and
N2O emissions from each industry
segment specified in paragraphs (b)
through (j) and (m) of this section, CO2,
CH4, and N2O emissions from each flare
as specified in paragraphs (b) through (j)
of this section, and stationary and
portable combustion emissions as
applicable as specified in paragraph (k)
of this section. You must also report the
information specified in paragraphs (l)
and (n) of this section, as applicable.
(b) For offshore petroleum and natural
gas production, report CO2, CH4, and
N2O emissions from equipment leaks,
vented emission, and flare emission
source types as identified by Bureau of
Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) in
compliance with 30 CFR 550.302
through 304 and CO2 and CH4 emissions
from other large release events. Offshore
platforms do not need to report portable
emissions.
(c) * * *
(2) Blowdown vent stacks.
*
*
*
*
*
(10) Hydrocarbon liquids and
produced water storage tank emissions.
*
*
*
*
*
(17) Acid gas removal unit vents and
nitrogen removal unit vents.
*
*
*
*
*
(21) Equipment leaks listed in
paragraph (c)(21)(i) or (ii) of this section,
as applicable:
(i) Equipment leaks from components
including valves, connectors, open
ended lines, pressure relief valves,
pumps, flanges, and other components
(such as instruments, loading arms,
stuffing boxes, compressor seals, dump
lever arms, and breather caps, but does
not include components listed in
paragraph (c)(11) or (19) of this section,
and it does not include thief hatches or
other openings on a storage vessel).
(ii) Equipment leaks from major
equipment including wellheads,
separators, meters/piping, compressors,
dehydrators, heaters, and storage
vessels.
*
*
*
*
*
(23) Other large release events.
(24) Drilling mud degassing.
(25) Crankcase vents.
(d) * * *
(5) Acid gas removal unit vents and
nitrogen removal unit vents.
*
*
*
*
*
(7) Equipment leaks from valves,
connectors, open ended lines, pressure
relief valves, and meters, and equipment
leaks from all other components in gas
service (not including thief hatches or
other openings on storage vessels) that
either are subject to equipment leak
standards for onshore natural gas
PO 00000
Frm 00098
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
processing plants in § 60.5400b of this
chapter, or an applicable approved state
plan or applicable Federal plan in part
62 of this chapter or that you elect to
survey using a leak detection method
described in § 98.234(a).
(8) Natural gas pneumatic device
venting.
(9) Other large release events.
(10) Hydrocarbon liquids and
produced water storage tank emissions.
(11) Crankcase vents.
(e) * * *
(3) Condensate storage tanks.
*
*
*
*
*
(8) Equipment leaks from all other
components that are not listed in
paragraph (e)(1), (2), or (7) of this
section and either are subject to the well
site or compressor station fugitive
emissions standards in § 60.5397a of
this chapter, the fugitive emissions
standards for well sites, centralized
production facilities, and compressor
stations in § 60.5397b of this chapter, or
an applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of
this chapter, or that you elect to survey
using a leak detection method described
in § 98.234(a). The other components
subject to this paragraph (e)(8) also do
not include thief hatches or other
openings on a storage vessel.
(9) Other large release events.
(10) Dehydrator vents.
(11) Crankcase vents.
(f) * * *
(6) Equipment leaks from all other
components that are associated with
storage stations, are not listed in
paragraph (f)(1), (2), or (5) of this
section, and either are subject to the
well site or compressor station fugitive
emissions standards in § 60.5397a of
this chapter, the fugitive emissions
standards for well sites, centralized
production facilities, and compressor
stations in § 60.5397b of this chapter, or
an applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of
this chapter or that you elect to survey
using a leak detection method described
in § 98.234(a). The other components
subject to this paragraph (f)(6) do not
include thief hatches or other openings
on a storage vessel.
*
*
*
*
*
(8) Equipment leaks from all other
components that are associated with
storage wellheads, are not listed in
paragraph (f)(1), (2), or (7) of this
section, and either are subject to the
well site or compressor station fugitive
emissions standards in § 60.5397a of
this chapter, the fugitive emissions
standards for well sites, centralized
production facilities, and compressor
stations in § 60.5397b of this chapter, or
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
an applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of
this chapter or that you elect to survey
using a leak detection method described
in § 98.234(a).
(9) Other large release events.
(10) Dehydrator vents.
(11) Blowdown vent stacks.
(12) Condensate storage tanks.
(13) Crankcase vents.
(g) * * *
(6) Equipment leaks from all
components in gas service that are
associated with a vapor recovery
compressor, are not listed in paragraph
(g)(1) or (2) of this section, and either
are subject to the well site or
compressor station fugitive emissions
standards in § 60.5397a of this chapter,
the fugitive emissions standards for well
sites, centralized production facilities,
and compressor stations in § 60.5397b of
this chapter, or an applicable approved
state plan or applicable Federal plan in
part 62 of this chapter or that you elect
to survey using a leak detection method
described in § 98.234(a).
(7) Equipment leaks from all
components in gas service that are not
associated with a vapor recovery
compressor, are not listed in paragraph
(g)(1) or (2) of this section, and either
are subject to the well site or
compressor station fugitive emissions
standards in § 60.5397a of this chapter,
the fugitive emissions standards for well
sites, centralized production facilities,
and compressor stations in § 60.5397b of
this chapter, or an applicable approved
state plan or applicable Federal plan in
part 62 of this chapter or that you elect
to survey using a leak detection method
described in § 98.234(a).
(8) Other large release events.
(9) Blowdown vent stacks.
(10) Acid gas removal unit vents and
nitrogen removal unit vents.
(11) Crankcase vents.
(h) * * *
(7) Equipment leaks from all
components in gas service that are
associated with a vapor recovery
compressor, are not listed in paragraph
(h)(1) or (2) of this section, and either
are subject to the well site or
compressor station fugitive emissions
standards in § 60.5397a of this chapter,
the fugitive emissions standards for well
sites, centralized production facilities,
and compressor stations in § 60.5397b of
this chapter, or an applicable approved
state plan or applicable Federal plan in
part 62 of this chapter or that you elect
to survey using a leak detection method
described in § 98.234(a).
(8) Equipment leaks from all
components in gas service that are not
associated with a vapor recovery
compressor, are not listed in paragraph
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
(h)(1) or (2) of this section, and either
are subject to the well site or
compressor station fugitive emissions
standards in § 60.5397a of this chapter,
the fugitive emissions standards for well
sites, centralized production facilities,
and compressor stations in § 60.5397b of
this chapter, or an applicable approved
state plan or applicable Federal plan in
part 62 of this chapter or that you elect
to survey using a leak detection method
described in § 98.234(a).
(9) Acid gas removal unit vents and
nitrogen removal unit vents.
(10) Other large release events.
(11) Crankcase vents.
(i) * * *
(8) Other large release events.
(9) Blowdown vent stacks.
(10) Natural gas pneumatic device
venting.
(11) Crankcase vents.
(j) * * *
(3) Acid gas removal unit vents and
nitrogen removal unit vents.
*
*
*
*
*
(6) Hydrocarbon liquids and produced
water storage tank emissions.
*
*
*
*
*
(10) Equipment leaks listed in
paragraph (j)(10)(i) or (ii) of this section,
as applicable:
(i) Equipment leaks from components
including valves, connectors, open
ended lines, pressure relief valves,
pumps, flanges, and other components
(such as instruments, loading arms,
stuffing boxes, compressor seals, dump
lever arms, and breather caps, but does
not include components in paragraph
(j)(8) or (9) of this section, and it does
not include thief hatches or other
openings on a storage vessel).
(ii) Equipment leaks from major
equipment including wellheads,
separators, meters/piping, compressors,
dehydrators, heaters, and storage
vessels.
*
*
*
*
*
(13) Other large release events.
(14) Crankcase vents.
*
*
*
*
*
(m) For onshore natural gas
transmission pipeline, report CO2, CH4,
and N2O emissions from the following
source types:
(1) Blowdown vent stacks.
(2) Other large release events.
(3) Equipment leaks at transmission
company interconnect meteringregulating stations.
(4) Equipment leaks at farm tap and/
or direct sale metering-regulating
stations.
(5) Transmission pipeline equipment
leaks.
(n) For all facilities meeting the
applicability provisions under § 98.2
PO 00000
Frm 00099
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50379
and, if applicable, § 98.231, report the
information required under subpart B of
this part (Metered, Non-fuel, Purchased
Energy Consumption by Stationary
Sources).
■ 12. Amend § 98.233 by:
■ a. Revising paragraphs (a), (c), (d), (e)
introductory text, (e)(1) introductory
text, (e)(1)(i), (ii), (x), and (xi), and (e)(2)
introductory text;
■ b. Revising parameter ‘‘Count’’ of
Equation W–5 in paragraph (e)(2);
■ c. Revising paragraph (e)(3)
introductory text;
■ d. Removing paragraph (e)(4);
■ e. Redesignating paragraphs (e)(5) and
(6) as (e)(4) and (5), respectively;
■ f. Revising newly redesignated
paragraphs (e)(4) and (5) and paragraphs
(f), (g) introductory text, and (g)(1)
introductory text;
■ g. Removing and reserving paragraph
(g)(1)(ii);
■ h. Revising parameter ‘‘FRs,p’’ and ‘‘N’’
of Equation W–12A in paragraph
(g)(1)(iii);
■ i. Revising parameters ‘‘FRi,p’’ and
‘‘N’’ of Equation W–12B in paragraph
(g)(1)(iv);
■ j. Removing paragraph (g)(4);
■ k. Revising paragraph (h) introductory
text;
■ l. Removing and reserving paragraph
(h)(2);
■ m. Revising paragraph (i)(2)
introductory text;
■ n. Revising parameters ‘‘Ta’’ and ‘‘Pa’’
of Equation W–14A in paragraph
(i)(2)(i);
■ o. Revising parameters ‘‘Ta,p’’, ‘‘Pa,b,p’’,
and ‘‘Pa,e,p’’ of Equation W–14B in
paragraph (i)(2)(i);
■ p. Adding paragraph (i)(2)(iv);
■ q. Revising paragraphs (j) and (k)
introductory text,
■ r. Removing paragraph (k)(5);
■ s. Revising paragraphs (l) introductory
text and (l)(3);
■ t. Removing paragraph (l)(6);
■ u. Revising paragraphs (m)
introductory text and (m)(3);
■ v. Removing paragraph (m)(5);
■ w. Revising paragraphs (n), (o)
introductory text, (o)(1)(i) introductory
text, (o)(1)(i)(A) through (C), (o)(2)
introductory text, (o)(2)(i) introductory
text, and (o)(2)(ii);
■ x. Adding paragraph (o)(2)(iii);
■ y. Removing and reserving paragraph
(o)(4)(ii)(D);
■ z. Revising paragraphs (o)(4)(ii)(E) and
(o)(6)(i) introductory text;
■ aa. Revising parameter ‘‘m’’ of
Equation W–21 in paragraph (o)(6)(i);
■ bb. Revising paragraph (o)(6)(ii)
introductory text;
■ cc. Revising parameter ‘‘m’’ of
Equation W–22 in paragraph (o)(6)(ii);
■ dd. Revising paragraph (o)(6)(iii)
introductory text;
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50380
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
ee. Revising parameter ‘‘m’’ of
Equation W–23 in paragraph (o)(6)(iii);
■ ff. Revising parameter ‘‘Tg’’ of
Equation W–24B in paragraph (o)(8);
■ gg. Revising paragraph (o)(10);
■ hh. Removing paragraph (o)(12);
■ ii. Revising paragraphs (p)
introductory text, (p)(1)(i), (p)(2)
introductory text, (p)(2)(ii) introductory
text, (p)(2)(ii)(C), (p)(2)(iii)(A), and
(p)(4)(ii)(C);
■ jj. Removing and reserving paragraph
(p)(4)(ii)(D);
■ kk. Revising paragraphs (p)(4)(ii)(E),
(p)(6)(ii) introductory text, and (p)(6)(iii)
introductory text,
■ ll. Revising parameter ‘‘Tg’’ of
Equation W–29B in paragraph (p)(8);
■ mm. Revising paragraph (p)(10);
■ nn. Removing paragraph (p)(12);
■ oo. Revising paragraphs (q)
introductory text, (q)(1), (q)(2)
introductory text, (q)(2)(i), and (q)(2)(iii)
through (xi);
■ pp. Adding paragraphs (q)(3) and (4);
■ qq. Revising paragraphs (r) and (s);
■ rr. In paragraph (t)(2), revising
parameter ‘‘Za’’ of Equation W–34, and
removing the undesignated paragraph
following the parameters of Equation
W–34;
■ ss. Revising paragraphs (u)(2)(ii), (y),
and (z);
■ tt. Adding and reserving paragraphs
(aa) through (cc); and
■ uu. Adding paragraphs (dd) and (ee).
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
■
§ 98.233
Calculating GHG emissions.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
*
*
*
*
*
(a) Natural gas pneumatic device
venting. For all natural gas pneumatic
devices at onshore petroleum and
natural gas production facilities,
onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facilities,
onshore natural gas processing facilities,
onshore natural gas transmission
compression facilities, underground
natural gas storage facilities, and natural
gas distribution facilities, use the
applicable provisions as specified in
this paragraph (a) of this section to
calculate CH4 and CO2 emissions from
natural gas pneumatic device venting. If
you have a flow meter on the natural gas
supply line dedicated to any one or
combination of natural gas pneumatic
devices or natural gas driven pneumatic
pumps vented directly to the
atmosphere for any portion of the year,
you must use the method specified in
paragraph (a)(1) of this section to
calculate CH4 and CO2 emissions from
those devices. For natural gas
pneumatic devices vented directly to
the atmosphere for which the natural
gas supply rate is not measured, use the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
applicable methods specified in
paragraphs (a)(2) through (6) of this
section to calculate CH4 and CO2
emissions. For natural gas pneumatic
devices that are routed to flares,
combustion, or vapor recovery systems,
use the applicable provisions specified
in paragraphs (a)(7) of this section.
(1) Calculation Method 1. If you have
or elect to install a flow meter on the
natural gas supply line dedicated to any
one or combination of natural gas
pneumatic devices and natural gas
driven pneumatic pumps that are
vented directly to the atmosphere, you
must use the applicable methods
specified in paragraph (a)(1)(i) through
(iv) of this section to calculate CH4 and
CO2 emissions from those devices.
(i) For volumetric flow monitors:
(A) Determine the cumulative annual
volumetric flow, in standard cubic feet,
as measured by the flow monitor in the
reporting year. If all natural gas
pneumatic devices supplied by the
measured natural gas supply line are
routed to the atmosphere for only a
portion of the year and are routed to a
flare, combustion, or vapor recovery
system for the remaining portion of the
year, determine the cumulative annual
volumetric flow considering only those
times when one or more of the natural
gas pneumatic devices were vented
directly to the atmosphere. If the flow
meter was installed during the year,
escalate the measured volumetric flow
by the ratio of the total hours for which
natural gas was supplied to the devices
to the number of hours the natural gas
supplied to the devices was measured.
(B) Convert the natural gas volumetric
flow from paragraph (a)(1)(i)(A) of this
section to CH4 and CO2 volumetric
emissions following the provisions in
paragraph (u) of this section.
(C) Convert the CH4 and CO2
volumetric emissions from paragraph
(a)(1)(i)(B) of this section to CH4 and
CO2 mass emissions using calculations
in paragraph (v) of this section.
(ii) For mass flow monitors:
(A) Determine the cumulative annual
mass flow, in metric tons, as measured
by the flow monitor in the reporting
year. If all natural gas pneumatic
devices supplied by the measured
natural gas supply line are vented
directly to the atmosphere for only a
portion of the year and are routed to a
flare, combustion, or vapor recovery
system for the remaining portion of the
year, determine the cumulative annual
mass flow considering only those times
when one or more of the natural gas
pneumatic devices were vented directly
to the atmosphere. If the flow meter was
installed during the year, escalate the
measured mass flow by the ratio of the
PO 00000
Frm 00100
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
total hours for which natural gas was
supplied to the devices to the number
of hours the natural gas supplied to the
devices was measured.
(B) Convert the cumulative mass flow
from paragraph (a)(1)(ii)(A) of this
section to CH4 and CO2 mass emissions
by multiplying by the mass fraction of
CH4 and CO2 in the supplied natural
gas. You must follow the provisions in
paragraph (u) of this section for
determining the mole fraction of CH4
and CO2 and use molecular weights of
16 kg/kg-mol and 44 kg/kg-mol for CH4
and CO2, respectively. You may assume
unspecified components have an
average molecular weight of 28 kg/kgmol.
(iii) If the flow meter on the natural
gas supply line serves both natural gas
pneumatic devices and natural gas
driven pneumatic pumps, disaggregate
the total measured amount of natural
gas to pneumatic devices and natural
gas driven pneumatic pumps based on
engineering calculations and best
available data.
(iv) The flow meter must be operated
and calibrated according to the methods
set forth in § 98.234(b).
(2) Calculation Method 2. Except as
provided in paragraphs (a)(1) and (3) of
this section, you must measure the
volumetric flow rate of each natural gas
pneumatic device vent that vents
directly to the atmosphere at your
facility as specified in paragraphs
(a)(2)(i) through (ix) of this section. You
must exclude the counts of devices
measured according to paragraph (a)(1)
of this section from the counts of
devices to be measured or for which
emissions are calculated according to
the requirements in this paragraph
(a)(2).
(i) For facilities in the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
and onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting industry
segments, you must measure all natural
gas pneumatic devices at your facility at
least once every 5 years. If you elect to
measure your pneumatic devices over
multiple years, you must measure
approximately the same number of
devices each year. When you measure
the emissions from natural gas
pneumatic devices at a well-pad or
gathering and boosting site, you must
measure all natural gas pneumatic
devices that are vented directly to the
atmosphere at the well-pad or gathering
and boosting site during the same
calendar year.
(ii) For facilities in the onshore
natural gas processing, onshore natural
gas transmission compression,
underground natural gas storage, or
natural gas distribution industry
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
segments, you must either measure all
natural gas pneumatic devices vented
directly to the atmosphere at your
facility each year if your facility has less
than 26 pneumatic devices or over
multiple years not to exceed the number
of years as specified in paragraphs
(a)(2)(ii)(A) through (D) of this section.
If you elect to measure your pneumatic
devices over multiple years, you must
measure approximately the same
number of devices each year.
(A) If your facility has at least 26 but
not more than 50 natural gas pneumatic
devices vented directly to the
atmosphere, the maximum number of
years to measure all devices at your
facility is 2 years.
(B) If your facility has at least 51 but
not more than 75 natural gas pneumatic
devices vented directly to the
atmosphere, the maximum number of
years to measure all devices at your
facility is 3 years.
(C) If your facility has at least 76 but
not more than 100 natural gas
pneumatic devices vented directly to
the atmosphere, the maximum number
of years to measure all devices at your
facility is 4 years.
(D) If your facility has 101 or more
natural gas pneumatic devices vented
directly to the atmosphere, the
maximum number of years to measure
all devices at your facility is 5 years.
(iii) For all industry segments,
determine the volumetric flow rate of
each natural gas pneumatic device vent
(in standard cubic feet per hour) using
one of the methods specified in
§ 98.234(b) through (d), as appropriate,
according to the requirements specified
in paragraphs (a)(2)(iii)(A) through (D)
of this section.
(A) If you use a temporary meter, such
as a vane anemometer, according to the
methods set forth in § 98.234(b) or a
high volume sampler according to
methods set forth § 98.234(d), you must
measure the emissions from each device
for a minimum of 15 minutes while the
device is in service (i.e., supplied with
natural gas), except for natural gas
pneumatic isolation valve actuators. For
natural gas pneumatic isolation valve
actuators, you must measure the
emissions from each device for a
minimum of 5 minutes while the device
is in service (i.e., supplied with natural
gas). If there is no measurable flow from
the natural gas pneumatic device after
the minimum sampling period, you can
discontinue monitoring and follow the
applicable methods in paragraph
(a)(2)(v) of this section.
(B) If you use calibrated bagging,
follow the methods set forth in
§ 98.234(c) except you need only fill one
bag to have a valid measurement. You
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
must collect sample for a minimum of
5 minutes for natural gas pneumatic
isolation valve actuators or 15 minutes
for other natural gas pneumatic devices.
If no gas is collected in the calibrated
bag during the minimum sampling
period, you can discontinue monitoring
and follow the applicable methods in
paragraph (a)(2)(v) of this section. If gas
is collected in the bag during the
minimum sampling period, you must
either continue sampling until you fill
the calibrated bag or you may elect to
remeasure the vent according to
paragraph (a)(2)(iii)(A) of this section.
(C) You do not need to use the same
measurement method for each natural
gas pneumatic device vent.
(D) If the measurement method
selected measures the volumetric flow
rate in actual cubic feet, convert the
measured flow to standard cubic feet
following the methods specified in
paragraph (t)(1) of this section.
(iv) For all industry segments, if there
is measurable flow from the device vent,
calculate the volume of natural gas
emitted from each natural gas
pneumatic device vent as the product of
the natural gas flow rate measured in
paragraph (a)(2)(iii) of this section and
the number of hours the pneumatic
device was in service (i.e., supplied
with natural gas) in the calendar year.
(v) For all industry segments, if there
is no measurable flow from the device
vent, estimate the emissions from the
device according to the methods in
paragraphs (a)(2)(v)(A) through (C) of
this section, as applicable.
(A) For continuous high bleed
pneumatic devices:
(1) Confirm that the device is inservice. If not, remeasure the device
according to paragraph (a)(2)(iii) of this
section at a time the device is in-service.
(2) Confirm that the device is
correctly characterized as a continuous
high bleed pneumatic device according
to the provisions in paragraph (a)(6) of
this section. If the device type was
mischaracterized, recharacterize the
device type and use the appropriate
methods in paragraphs (a)(2)(v)(B) or (C)
of this section, as applicable.
(3) Upon confirmation of the items in
paragraphs (a)(2)(v)(A)(1) and (2) of this
section, remeasure the device vent using
a different measurement method or
longer monitoring duration until the
volumetric venting rate can be
accurately quantified.
(B) For continuous low bleed
pneumatic devices:
(1) Confirm that the device is inservice. If not, remeasure the device
according to paragraph (a)(2)(iii) of this
section at a time the device is in-service.
PO 00000
Frm 00101
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50381
(2) Determine natural gas bleed rate
(in standard cubic feet per hour) at the
supply pressure used for the pneumatic
device based on the manufacturer’s
steady state natural gas bleed rate
reported for the device. If the steady
state bleed rate is reported in terms of
air consumption, multiply the air
consumption rate by 1.29 to calculate
the steady state natural gas bleed rate.
If a steady state bleed rate is not
reported, you need to reassess whether
the device is correctly characterized as
a continuous low bleed pneumatic
device according to the provisions in
paragraph (a)(6) of this section.
(3) Calculate the volume of natural gas
emitted from the natural gas pneumatic
device vent as the product of the natural
gas steady state bleed rate determined in
paragraph (a)(2)(v)(B)(2) of this section
and number of hours the pneumatic
device was in service (i.e., supplied
with natural gas) in the calendar year.
(C) For intermittent bleed pneumatic
devices:
(1) Confirm that the device is inservice. If not, remeasure the device
according to paragraph (a)(2)(iii) of this
section at a time the device is in-service
and calculate natural gas emissions
according to paragraph (a)(2)(iv) of this
section. For devices confirmed to be inservice during the measurement period,
calculate natural gas emissions
according to paragraph (a)(2)(v)(C)(2)
through (5) of this section.
(2) Calculate the volume of the
controller, tubing and actuator (in actual
cubic feet) based on the device and
tubing size.
(3) Sum the volumes in paragraph
(a)(2)(v)(C)(2) of this section and convert
the volume to standard cubic feet
following the methods specified in
paragraph (t)(1) of this section based on
the natural gas supply pressure.
(4) Estimate the number of actuations
during the year based on company
records, if available, or best engineering
estimates. For isolation valve actuators,
you may multiply the number of valve
closures during the year by 2 (one
actuation to close the valve; one
actuation to open the valve).
(5) Calculate the volume of natural gas
emitted from the natural gas pneumatic
device vent as the product of the per
actuation volume in standard cubic feet
determined in paragraph (a)(2)(v)(C)(3)
of this section, the number of actuations
during the year as determined in
paragraph (a)(2)(v)(C)(4) of this section,
and the relay correction factor. Use 1 for
the relay correction factor if there is no
relay; use 3 for the relay correction
factor if there is a relay.
(6) Calculate the hourly average
volume of natural gas emitted from the
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
natural gas pneumatic device vent by
dividing the volume of natural gas
emitted as determined in paragraph
(a)(2)(v)(C)(5) of this section by the
number of hours the pneumatic device
was in service (i.e., supplied with
natural gas) in the calendar year.
(vi) For each pneumatic device,
convert the volumetric emissions of
natural gas at standard conditions
determined in paragraph (a)(2)(iv) or (v)
of this section, as applicable, to CO2 and
CH4 volumetric emissions at standard
conditions using the methods specified
in paragraph (u) of this section.
(vii) For each pneumatic device,
convert the GHG volumetric emissions
at standard conditions determined in
paragraph (a)(2)(vi) of this section to
GHG mass emissions using the methods
specified in paragraph (v) of this
section.
(viii) Sum the CO2 and CH4 mass
emissions determined in paragraph
(a)(2)(vii) of this section separately for
each type of natural gas pneumatic
device (continuous high bleed,
continuous low bleed, and intermittent
bleed).
(ix) If you chose to conduct natural
gas pneumatic device measurements
over multiple years, ‘‘n,’’ according to
paragraph (a)(2)(i) or (ii) of this section,
then you must calculate the emissions
from all pneumatic devices at your
facility as specified in paragraph
(a)(2)(ix)(A) through (D) of this section.
(A) Use the emissions calculated in
(a)(2)(viii) of this section for the devices
measured during the reporting year.
(B) Calculate the whole gas emission
factor for each type of pneumatic device
at the facility using Equation W–1A and
all available data from the current year
and the previous years in your
monitoring cycle (n–1 years) for which
natural gas pneumatic device vent
measurements were made according to
Calculation Method 2 in paragraph
(a)(2) of this section (e.g., if your
monitoring cycle is 3 years, then use
measured data from the current year and
the two previous years). This emission
factor must be updated annually.
Where:
EFt = Whole gas population emission factor
for natural gas pneumatic device vents of
type ‘‘t’’ (continuous high bleed,
continuous low bleed, intermittent
bleed), in standard cubic feet per hour
per device.
MTs,t,y = Volumetric whole gas emissions rate
measurement at standard (‘‘s’’)
conditions from component type ‘‘t’’
during year ‘‘y’’ in standard cubic feet
per hour, as calculated in paragraph
(a)(2)(iii) [if there was measurable flow
from the device vent], (a)(2)(v)(B)(2), or
(a)(2)(v)(C)(6) of this section, as
applicable.
Countt,y = Count of natural gas pneumatic
device vents of type ‘‘t’’ measured
according to Calculation Method 2 in
year ‘‘y.’’
n = Number of years of data to include in the
emission factor calculation according to
the number of years used to monitor all
natural gas pneumatic device vents at the
facility.
Where:
Es,i = Annual total volumetric GHG emissions
at standard conditions in standard cubic
feet per year from natural gas pneumatic
device vents, of types ‘‘t’’ (continuous
high bleed, continuous low bleed,
intermittent bleed), for GHGi.
Countt = Total number of natural gas
pneumatic devices of type ‘‘t’’
(continuous high bleed, continuous low
bleed, intermittent bleed) as determined
in paragraphs (a)(4) through (6) of this
section that vent directly to the
atmosphere and that were not directly
measured according to the requirements
in paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2)(iii) of this
section.
EFt = Population emission factors for natural
gas pneumatic device vents (in standard
cubic feet per hour per device) of each
type ‘‘t’’ (continuous high bleed,
continuous low bleed, intermittent
bleed) as calculated using Equation W–
1A of this section.
GHGi = For onshore petroleum and natural
gas production facilities, onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities, onshore natural gas
processing, onshore natural gas
transmission compression facilities,
underground natural gas storage
facilities, and natural gas distribution
facilities, concentration of GHGi, CH4 or
CO2, in produced natural gas or
processed natural gas for each facility as
specified in paragraph (u)(2) of this
section.
Tt = Average estimated number of hours in
the operating year the devices, of each
type ‘‘t’’, were in service (i.e., supplied
with natural gas) using engineering
estimates based on best available data.
Default is 8,760 hours.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00102
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
mass emissions by device type for
Calculation Method 2.
(3) Calculation Method 3. As an
alternative to Calculation Method 2, you
may elect to use the applicable methods
specified in paragraphs (a)(3)(i) through
(v) of this section, as applicable, to
calculate CH4 and CO2 emissions from
your natural gas pneumatic devices that
are vented directly to the atmosphere at
your facility except those that are
measured according to paragraph (a)(1)
of this section. You must exclude the
counts of devices measured according to
paragraph (a)(1) of this section from the
counts of devices to be monitored or for
which emissions are calculated
according to the requirements in this
paragraph (a)(3).
(i) For continuous high bleed and
continuous low bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices vented directly to
the atmosphere, you must calculate CH4
and CO2 volumetric emissions using
either the methods in paragraph
(a)(3)(i)(A) or (B) of this section.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
EP01AU23.001
(D) Convert the volumetric emissions
calculated using Equation W–1B to CH4
and CO2 mass emissions using the
methods specified in paragraph (v) of
this section.
(E) Sum the CH4 and CO2 mass
emissions calculated in paragraphs
(a)(2)(ix)(A) and (D) of this section
separately for each type of pneumatic
device (continuous high bleed,
continuous low bleed, intermittent
bleed) to calculate the total CH4 and CO2
(C) Calculate CH4 and CO2 volumetric
emissions from continuous high bleed,
continuous low bleed, and intermittent
bleed natural gas pneumatic devices
that were not measured during the
reporting year using Equation W–1B of
this section.
EP01AU23.000
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50382
50383
(A) Measure all continuous high bleed
and continuous low bleed pneumatic
devices at your well-pad, gathering and
boosting site, or facility, as applicable,
according to the provisions in
paragraphs (a)(2) of this section.
(B) Use Equation W–1B, except use
the appropriate default whole gas
population emission factors for natural
gas pneumatic device vents (in standard
cubic feet per hour per device) of each
type ‘‘t’’ (continuous high bleed and
continuous low bleed) as listed in table
W–1 to this subpart.
(ii) For intermittent bleed pneumatic
devices, you must monitor each
intermittent bleed pneumatic device at
your facility using the methods
specified in paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(A) of
this section at the frequency specified in
paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(B) or (C) of this
section, as applicable.
(A) You must use one of the
monitoring methods specified in
§ 98.234(a)(1) through (3) except that the
monitoring dwell time for each device
vent must be at least 2 minutes or until
a malfunction is identified, whichever is
shorter. A device is considered
malfunctioning if any leak is observed
when the device is not actuating or if a
leak is observed for more than 5 seconds
during a device actuation. If you cannot
tell when a device is actuating, any
observed leak from the device indicates
a malfunctioning device.
(B) For facilities in the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
and onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting industry
segments, you must monitor all natural
gas intermittent bleed pneumatic
devices at your facility at least once
every 5 years. If you elect to monitor
your pneumatic devices over multiple
years, you must monitor approximately
the same number of devices each year.
When you monitor the emissions from
natural gas pneumatic devices at a wellpad or gathering and boosting site, you
must monitor all natural gas
intermittent bleed pneumatic devices
that are vented directly to the
atmosphere at the well-pad or gathering
and boosting site during the same
calendar year.
(C) For facilities in the onshore
natural gas processing, onshore natural
gas transmission compression,
underground natural gas storage, or
natural gas distribution industry
segments you must either monitor all
natural gas intermittent bleed
pneumatic devices vented directly to
the atmosphere at your facility each year
if your facility has less than 101
intermittent bleed pneumatic devices or
over multiple years not to exceed the
number of years as specified in
paragraphs (a)(3)(ii)(C)(1) through (4) of
this section. If you elect to monitor your
intermittent bleed pneumatic devices
over multiple years, you must monitor
approximately the same number of
devices each year.
(1) If your facility has at least 101 but
not more than 200 natural gas
intermittent bleed pneumatic devices
vented directly to the atmosphere, the
maximum number of years to monitor
all devices at your facility is 2 years.
(2) If your facility has at least 201 but
not more than 300 natural gas
intermittent bleed pneumatic devices
vented directly to the atmosphere, the
maximum number of years to monitor
all devices at your facility is 3 years.
(3) If your facility has at least 301 but
not more than 400 natural gas
intermittent bleed pneumatic devices
vented directly to the atmosphere, the
maximum number of years to monitor
all devices at your facility is 4 years.
(4) If your facility has 401 or more
natural gas intermittent bleed
pneumatic devices vented directly to
the atmosphere, the maximum number
of years to monitor all devices at your
facility is 5 years.
(iii) For intermittent bleed pneumatic
devices that are monitored according to
paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(A) of this section
during the reporting year, you must
calculate CH4 and CO2 volumetric
emissions from intermittent bleed
natural gas pneumatic devices vented
directly to the atmosphere using
Equation W–1C of this section.
Where:
Ei = Annual total volumetric emissions of
GHGi from intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices in standard cubic
feet.
GHGi = Concentration of GHGi, CH4, or CO2,
in natural gas supplied to the
intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic
device as defined in paragraph (u)(2) of
this section.
x = Total number of intermittent bleed
natural gas pneumatic devices detected
as malfunctioning in any pneumatic
device monitoring survey during the
year. A component found as
malfunctioning in two or more surveys
during the year is counted as one
malfunctioning component.
16.1 = Whole gas emission factor for
malfunctioning intermittent bleed
natural gas pneumatic devices, in
standard cubic feet per hour per device.
Tmal,z = The total time the surveyed
pneumatic device ‘‘z’’ was in service
(i.e., supplied with natural gas) and
assumed to be malfunctioning, in hours.
If one pneumatic device monitoring
survey is conducted in the calendar year,
assume the device found malfunctioning
was malfunctioning for the entire
calendar year. If multiple pneumatic
device monitoring surveys are conducted
in the calendar year, assume a device
found malfunctioning in the first survey
was malfunctioning since the beginning
of the year until the date of the survey;
assume a device found malfunctioning in
the last survey of the year was
malfunctioning from the preceding
survey through the end of the year;
assume a device found malfunctioning in
a survey between the first and last
surveys of the year was malfunctioning
since the preceding survey until the date
of the survey; and sum times for all
malfunctioning periods.
Tt,z = The total time the surveyed natural gas
pneumatic device ‘‘z’’ was in service
(i.e., supplied with natural gas) during
the year. Default is 8,760 hours for nonleap years and 8,784 hours for leap years.
2.82 = Whole gas emission factor for properly
operating intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices, in standard cubic
feet per hour per device.
Count = Total number of intermittent bleed
natural gas pneumatic devices that were
never observed to be malfunctioning
during any monitoring survey during the
year.
Tavg = The average time the intermittent
bleed natural gas pneumatic devices that
were never observed to be
malfunctioning during any monitoring
survey were in service (i.e., supplied
with natural gas) using engineering
estimates based on best available data.
Default is 8,760 hours for non-leap years
and 8,784 hours for leap years.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00103
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(A) You must conduct at least one
complete pneumatic device monitoring
survey in a calendar year. If you
conduct multiple complete pneumatic
device monitoring surveys in a calendar
year, you must use the results from each
complete pneumatic device monitoring
survey when calculating emissions
using Equation W–1C.
(B) For the purposes of paragraph
(a)(3)(iii)(A) of this section, a complete
monitoring survey is a survey of all
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
EP01AU23.002
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices vented directly to
the atmosphere at a well-pad for
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facilities, all intermittent
bleed pneumatic devices vented directly
to the atmosphere at a gathering and
boosting site for onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities, or all intermittent bleed
natural gas pneumatic devices vented
directly to the atmosphere at a facility
required to be monitored during a given
year for other applicable industry
segments.
(iv) For intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices that are not
monitored according to paragraph
(a)(3)(ii)(A) of this section during the
reporting you, you must calculate CH4
and CO2 volumetric emissions from
intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices vented directly to
the atmosphere as specified in
paragraphs (a)(3)(iv)(A) through (D) of
this section.
(A) Count the number of unique
intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices vented directly to
the atmosphere that were monitored
during the reporting year. If you
conducted multiple monitoring surveys,
count each device only once; do not
count the same device twice if it was
monitored two times during the
reporting year.
(B) Count the number of unique
intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices vented directly to
the atmosphere that were monitored
during the reporting year that were
identified as malfunctioning during the
reporting year. If you conducted
multiple monitoring surveys, count each
device only once; do not count the same
device twice if it was monitored and
identified as malfunctioning two
separate times during the reporting. If a
Where:
Ei = Annual total volumetric emissions of
GHGi from intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices in standard cubic
feet.
GHGi = Concentration of GHGi, CH4 or CO2,
in natural gas supplied to the
intermittent bleed device as defined in
paragraph (u)(2) of this section.
Tavg = The average time the intermittent
bleed natural gas pneumatic devices that
were not surveyed during the year were
in service (i.e., supplied with natural
gas) using engineering estimates based
on best available data. Default is 8,760
hours.
CountC = Total number of intermittent bleed
pneumatic devices that were not
surveyed during the year as determined
according to paragraph (a)(3)(iv)(C) of
this section.
16.1 = Whole gas emission factor for
malfunctioning intermittent bleed
natural gas pneumatic devices, in
standard cubic feet per hour per device.
CountB = Total number of unique
intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic
devices vented directly to the
atmosphere that were monitored during
the reporting year that were identified as
malfunctioning during the reporting year
as determined according to paragraph
(a)(3)(iv)(B) of this section.
CountA = Total number the number of unique
intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic
devices vented directly to the
atmosphere that were monitored during
the reporting year as determined
according to paragraph (a)(3)(iv)(A) of
this section.
2.82 = Whole gas emission factor for properly
operating intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices, in standard cubic
feet per hour per device.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
device was malfunctioning during one
monitoring survey and not during a
second, count that device as a device
that was identified as malfunctioning
during the reporting year.
(C) Determine the number of
intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices vented directly to
the atmosphere at your facility that were
not monitored during the reporting year
as the difference between the total count
of devices at your facility as determined
according to paragraphs (a)(4) through
(6) of this section and the count of
unique devices monitored during the
reporting year as determined in
paragraph (a)(3)(vi)(A) of this section.
(D) Calculate CH4 and CO2 volumetric
emissions from intermittent bleed
natural gas pneumatic devices vented
directly to the atmosphere that were not
monitored during the reporting year
using Equation W–1D of this section.
determine the total number of natural
gas pneumatic devices at the facility and
(v) You must convert the CH4 and CO2 the number of devices that are vented
directly to the atmosphere for each type
volumetric emissions as determined
of natural gas pneumatic device
according to paragraphs (a)(3)(i), (iii)
(continuous high bleed, continuous low
and (iv) of this section and calculate
both CO2 and CH4 mass emissions using bleed, and intermittent bleed), as
applicable, using engineering estimates
calculations in paragraph (v) of this
based on best available data. Counts of
section for each type of natural gas
natural gas pneumatic devices measured
pneumatic device (continuous high
or monitored during the reporting year
bleed, continuous low bleed, and
must be made based on actual counts.
intermittent bleed).
(6) Type of natural gas pneumatic
(4) Counts of natural gas pneumatic
devices. For all industry segments,
devices. For all industry segments,
determine ‘‘Countt’’ for Equation W–1A, determine the type of natural gas
pneumatic device using engineering
W–1B, or W–1C of this subpart for each
estimates based on best available
type of natural gas pneumatic device
(continuous high bleed, continuous low information.
(7) Routing to flares, combustion, or
bleed, and intermittent bleed) by
vapor recovery systems. Calculate
counting the total number of devices at
emissions from natural gas pneumatic
the facility, the number of devices that
devices routed to flares, combustion, or
are vented directly to the atmosphere
vapor recovery systems as specified in
and the number of those devices that
were measured or monitored during the paragraph (a)(7)(i) or (ii) of this section,
as applicable. If a device was vented
reporting year, as applicable, except as
directly to the atmosphere for part of the
specified in paragraph (a)(5) of this
year and routed to a flare, combustion
section.
unit, or vapor recovery system during
(5) Counts of onshore petroleum and
natural gas production industry segment another part of the year, then calculate
emissions from the time the device
or the onshore petroleum and natural
vents directly to the atmosphere as
gas gathering and boosting natural gas
specified in paragraph (a)(1), (2) or (3)
pneumatic devices. For facilities in the
of this section, as applicable, and
onshore petroleum and natural gas
calculate emissions from the time the
production industry segment or the
device was routed to a flare or
onshore petroleum and natural gas
combustion as specified in paragraph
gathering and boosting industry
segment, you have the option in the first (a)(7)(i) or (ii) of this section, as
applicable. During periods when natural
two consecutive calendar years to
PO 00000
Frm 00104
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
EP01AU23.003
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50384
50385
gas pneumatic device emissions are
collected in a vapor recovery system
that is not routed to combustion,
paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) and
(a)(7)(i) and (ii) of this section do not
apply and no emissions calculations are
required.
(i) If any natural gas pneumatic
devices were routed to a flare, you must
calculate CH4, CO2, and N2O emissions
for the flare stack as specified in
paragraph (n) of this section and report
emissions from the flare as specified in
§ 98.236(n).
(ii) If emissions from any natural gas
pneumatic devices were routed to
combustion units, you must calculate
and report emissions as specified in
subpart C of this part or calculate
emissions as specified in paragraph (z)
of this section and report emissions
from the combustion equipment as
specified in § 98.236(z), as applicable.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) Natural gas driven pneumatic
pump venting. Calculate emissions from
natural gas driven pneumatic pumps
venting directly to the atmosphere as
specified in paragraph (c)(1), (2), or (3)
of this section, as applicable. If you have
a flow meter on the natural gas supply
line that is dedicated to any one or more
natural gas driven pneumatic pumps,
each of which only vents directly to the
atmosphere, you must use Calculation
Method 1 as specified in paragraph
(c)(1) of this section to calculate vented
CH4 and CO2 emissions from those
pumps. Use Calculation Method 1 for
any portion of a year when all of the
pumps on the measured natural gas
supply line were vented directly to
atmosphere. For natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps vented directly to the
atmosphere for which the natural gas
supply rate is not measured, use either
the method specified in paragraph (c)(2)
or (3) of this section to calculate vented
CH4 and CO2 emissions for all of the
natural gas driven pneumatic pumps at
your facility that are not subject to
Calculation Method 1; you may not use
Calculation Method 2 for some vented
natural gas driven pneumatic pumps
and Calculation Method 3 for other
natural gas driven pneumatic pumps.
Similarly, if a flow meter is on a natural
gas supply line that supplies some
pumps that vent directly to the
atmosphere and others that route
emissions to flares, combustion, or
vapor recovery systems, then use either
the method specified in paragraph (c)(2)
or (3) of this section to calculate vented
CH4 and CO2 emissions because
Calculation Method 1 may not be used
for this natural gas supply line.
Calculate emissions from natural gas
driven pneumatic pumps routed to
flares or combustion as specified in
paragraph (c)(4) of this section. If a
pump vents directly to the atmosphere
for part of the year and to a flare or
combustion unit for another part of the
year, then calculate vented emissions
for the portion of the year when venting
occurs using the applicable method in
paragraph (c)(1), (2), or (3) of this
section for the period when venting
occurs, and calculate emissions for the
portion of the year when the emissions
are routed to a flare or combustion unit
using the method in paragraph (c)(4) of
this section. No emissions calculation is
required during periods when emissions
from a pump are routed to a vapor
recovery system without subsequently
being routed to combustion. All
references to natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps for Calculation
Method 1 in this paragraph (c) also
apply to combinations of pneumatic
devices and natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps that are served by a
common natural gas supply line; when
the supply line serves both pneumatic
devices and natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps, disaggregate the total
measured amount of natural gas to
pneumatic devices and natural gas
driven pneumatic pumps based on
engineering calculations and best
available data. You do not have to
calculate emissions from natural gas
driven pneumatic pumps covered in
paragraph (e) of this section under this
paragraph (c).
(1) Calculation Method 1. If you have
or elect to install a flow meter on a
supply line to natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps, then for the period of
the year when the natural gas supply
line is dedicated to any one or more
natural gas driven pneumatic pumps,
and the pumps are vented directly to the
atmosphere, you must use the
applicable methods specified in
paragraphs (c)(1)(i) or (ii) of this section
to calculate vented CH4 and CO2
emissions from those pumps.
(i) For volumetric flow monitors:
(A) Determine the cumulative annual
volumetric flow, in standard cubic feet,
as measured by the flow monitor in the
reporting year. If the flow meter was
installed during the year, calculate the
total annual volume of natural gas used
in the pumps that are connected to the
measured supply line by escalating the
measured volumetric flow by the ratio
of the total hours for which natural gas
was supplied to the pumps to the
number of hours the natural gas
supplied to the pumps was measured as
specified in Equation W–2A of this
section.
Where:
Es = Annual natural gas emissions for pumps
connected to natural gas supply line that
had a natural gas flow meter installed
during the year, in standard cubic feet.
Es,M = Measured volume of natural gas in the
supply line, from the time that the
natural gas flow meter began measuring
to the end of the year, in standard cubic
feet.
T = Total hours during the year in which at
least one of the pumps connected to the
supply line was operating, hr/yr.
TM = Total hours during the year when the
natural gas supply flow meter was
measuring flow.
(B) Convert the natural gas volumetric
flow from paragraph (c)(1)(i)(A) of this
section to CH4 and CO2 volumetric
emissions following the provisions in
paragraph (u) of this section.
(C) Convert the CH4 and CO2
volumetric emissions from paragraph
(c)(1)(i)(B) of this section to CH4 and
CO2 mass emissions using calculations
in paragraph (v) of this section.
(ii) For mass flow monitors:
(A) Determine the cumulative annual
mass flow, in metric tons, as measured
by the flow monitor in the reporting
year. If the flow meter was installed
during the year, calculate the total
annual mass of natural gas used in the
pumps that are connected to the
measured supply line by escalating the
measured mass flow by the ratio of the
total hours for which natural gas was
supplied to the pumps to the number of
hours the natural gas supplied to the
pumps was measured as specified in
Equation W–2A of paragraph (c)(1)(i)(A)
of this section, except that Es and Es,M
are in metric tons per year instead of
standard cubic feet per year.
(B) Convert the cumulative mass flow
from paragraph (c)(1)(ii)(A) of this
section to CH4 and CO2 mass emissions
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00105
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
EP01AU23.004
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
(iv) For each pneumatic pump,
convert the volumetric emissions of
natural gas at standard conditions
determined in paragraph (c)(2)(iii) of
this section to CO2 and CH4 volumetric
emissions at standard conditions using
the methods specified in paragraph (u)
of this section.
(v) For each pneumatic pump, convert
the GHG volumetric emissions at
standard conditions determined in
paragraph (c)(2)(iv) of this section to
GHG mass emissions using the methods
specified in paragraph (v) of this
section.
(vi) Sum the CO2 and CH4 mass
emissions determined in paragraph
(c)(2)(v) of this section.
(vii) If you chose to conduct natural
gas pneumatic pump measurements
over multiple years, ‘‘n,’’ according to
paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section, then
you must calculate the emissions from
all pneumatic pumps at your facility as
specified in paragraph (c)(2)(vii)(A)
through (D) of this section.
(A) Use the emissions calculated in
paragraph (c)(2)(vi) of this section for
the pumps measured during the
reporting year.
(B) Calculate the whole gas emission
factor for pneumatic pumps at the
facility using Equation W–2B of this
section and all available data from the
current year and the previous years in
your monitoring cycle (n-1 years) for
which natural gas pneumatic pump vent
measurements were made according to
Calculation Method 2 in paragraph
(c)(2) of this section (e.g., if your
monitoring cycle is 3 years, then use
measured data from the current year and
the two previous years). This emission
factor must be updated annually.
by multiplying by the mass fraction of
CH4 and CO2 in the supplied natural
gas. You must follow the provisions in
paragraph (u) of this section for
determining the mole fraction of CH4
and CO2 and use molecular weights of
16 kg/kg-mol and 44 kg/kg-mol for CH4
and CO2, respectively. You may assume
unspecified components have an
average molecular weight of 28 kg/kgmol.
(2) Calculation Method 2. Except as
provided in paragraph (c)(1) of this
section, you may elect to measure the
volumetric flow rate of each natural gas
driven pneumatic pump at your facility
that vents directly to the atmosphere as
specified in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through
(vii) of this section. You must exclude
the counts of pumps measured
according to paragraph (c)(1) of this
section from the counts of pumps to be
measured and for which emissions are
calculated according to the
requirements in this paragraph (c)(2).
(i) Measure all natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps at your facility at
least once every 5 years. If you elect to
measure your pneumatic pumps over
multiple years, you must measure
approximately the same number of
pumps each year. When you measure
the emissions from natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps at a well-pad or
gathering and boosting site, you must
measure all pneumatic pumps that are
vented directly to the atmosphere at the
well-pad or gathering and boosting site
during the same calendar year.
(ii) Determine the volumetric flow
rate of each natural gas driven
pneumatic pump (in standard cubic feet
per hour) using one of the methods
specified in § 98.234(b) through (d), as
appropriate, according to the
requirements specified in paragraphs
(c)(2)(ii)(A) through (D) of this section.
(A) If you use a temporary meter, such
as a vane anemometer, according to the
methods set forth in § 98.234(b) or a
high volume sampler according to
methods set forth § 98.234(d), you must
measure the emissions from each pump
for a minimum of 5 minutes, during a
period when the pump is continuously
pumping liquid.
(B) If you use calibrated bagging,
follow the methods set forth in
§ 98.234(c), except under § 98.234(c)(2),
only one bag must be filled to have a
valid measurement. You must collect
sample for a minimum of 5 minutes, or
until the bag is full, whichever is
shorter, during a period when the pump
is continuously pumping liquid. If the
bag is not full after 5 minutes, you must
either continue sampling until you fill
the calibrated bag or you may elect to
remeasure the vent according to
paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A) of this section.
(C) You do not need to use the same
measurement method for each natural
gas driven pneumatic pump vent.
(D) If the measurement method
selected measures the volumetric flow
rate in actual cubic feet, convert the
measured flow to standard cubic feet
following the methods specified in
paragraph (t)(1) of this section. Convert
the measured flow during the test
period to standard cubic feet per hour,
as appropriate.
(iii) Calculate the volume of natural
gas emitted from each natural gas driven
pneumatic pump vent as the product of
the natural gas emissions flow rate
measured in paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this
section and the number of hours that
liquid was pumped by the pneumatic
pump in the calendar year.
Where:
EFs = Whole gas population emission factor
for natural gas pneumatic pump vents, in
standard cubic feet per hour per pump.
MTs,y = Volumetric whole gas emissions rate
measurement at standard (‘‘s’’)
conditions during year ‘‘y’’ in standard
cubic feet per hour, as calculated in
paragraph (c)(2)(iii) of this section.
County = Count of natural gas driven
pneumatic pump vents measured
according to Calculation Method 2 in
year ‘‘y.’’
n = Number of years of data to include in the
emission factor calculation according to
the number of years used to monitor all
(C) Calculate CH4 and CO2 volumetric
emissions from natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps that were not
measured during the reporting year
using Equation W–2C of this section.
Where:
Es,i = Annual total volumetric GHG emissions
at standard conditions in standard cubic
feet per year from natural gas driven
pneumatic pump vents, for GHGi.
Count = Total number of natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps that vented directly to
the atmosphere and that were not
directly measured according to the
requirements in paragraphs (c)(1) or
(c)(2)(ii) of this section.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00106
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
EP01AU23.006
natural gas pneumatic pump vents at the
facility.
EP01AU23.005
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50386
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
EFs = Population emission factors for natural
gas driven pneumatic pumps (in
standard cubic feet per hour per pump)
as calculated using Equation W–2B of
this section.
GHGi = Concentration of GHGi, CH4 or CO2,
in produced natural gas as defined in
paragraph (u)(2)(i) of this section.
T = Average estimated number of hours in
the operating year the pumps that vented
directly to the atmosphere were pumping
liquid using engineering estimates based
on best available data. Default is 8,760
hours for pumps that only vented
directly to the atmosphere.
50387
(D) Calculate both CH4 and CO2 mass
emissions from volumetric emissions
calculated using Equation W–2C of this
section using calculations in paragraph
(v) of this section.
(E) Sum the CH4 and CO2 mass
emissions calculated in paragraphs
(c)(2)(vii)(A) and (D) of this section to
calculate the total CH4 and CO2 mass
emissions for Calculation Method 2.
(3) Calculation Method 3. If you elect
not to measure emissions as specified in
Calculation Method 2, then you must
use the applicable method specified in
paragraphs (c)(3)(i) and (ii) of this
section to calculate CH4 and CO2
emissions from all natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps that are vented
directly to the atmosphere at your
facility and that are not measured
according to paragraph (c)(1) of this
section. You must exclude the counts of
devices measured according to
paragraph (c)(1) of this section from the
counts of pumps for which emissions
are calculated according to the
requirements in this paragraph (c)(3).
(i) Calculate CH4 and CO2 volumetric
emissions from natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps using Equation W–2C
of this section, except use the
appropriate default whole gas
population emission factor for natural
gas pneumatic pump vents (in standard
cubic feet per hour per device) as
provided in table W–1 to this subpart.
(ii) Convert the CH4 and CO2
volumetric emissions determined
according to paragraph (c)(3)(i) of this
section to CO2 and CH4 mass emissions
using calculations in paragraph (v) of
this section.
(4) Routing to flares, combustion, or
vapor recovery systems. Calculate
emissions from natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps for periods when
they are routed to flares or combustion
as specified in paragraph (c)(4)(i) or (ii)
of this section, as applicable. If a pump
was vented directly to the atmosphere
for part of the year and routed to a flare
or combustion during another part of
the year, then calculate emissions from
the time the pump vents directly to the
atmosphere as specified in paragraphs
(c)(2) or (3) of this section and calculate
emissions from the time the pump was
routed to a flare or combustion as
specified in paragraphs (c)(4)(i) and (ii)
of this section, as applicable. For
emissions that are collected in a vapor
recovery system that is never routed to
combustion during the reporting year,
paragraphs (c)(2) and (3) and paragraphs
(c)(4)(i) and (ii) of this section do not
apply and no emissions calculations are
required.
(i) If any natural gas driven pneumatic
pumps were routed to a flare, you must
calculate CH4, CO2, and N2O emissions
for the flare stack as specified in
paragraph (n) of this section and report
emissions from the flare as specified in
§ 98.236(n).
(ii) If emissions from any natural gas
driven pneumatic pumps were routed to
combustion, you must calculate
emissions for the combustion
equipment as specified in paragraph (z)
of this section and report emissions
from the combustion equipment as
specified in § 98.236(z).
(d) Acid gas removal unit (AGR) vents
and Nitrogen removal unit (NRU) vents.
For AGR vents (including processes
such as amine, membrane, molecular
sieve or other absorbents and
adsorbents), calculate emissions for CH4
and CO2 vented directly to the
atmosphere or emitted through a sulfur
recovery plant, using any of the
calculation methods described in
paragraphs (d)(1) through (4) of this
section, and also comply with
paragraphs (d)(5) through (11) of this
section, as applicable. For NRU vents,
calculate emissions for CH4 vented
directly to the atmosphere using any of
the calculation methods described in
paragraphs (d)(1) through (4) of this
section, and also comply with
paragraphs (d)(5) through (11) of this
section, as applicable. If any AGR vents
or NRU vents are routed to a flare, you
must calculate CH4, CO2, and N2O
emissions for the flare stack as specified
in paragraph (n) of this section and
report emissions from the flare as
specified in § 98.236(n). If any AGR
vents or NRU vents are routed through
an engine (e.g., permeate from a
membrane or de-adsorbed gas from a
pressure swing adsorber used as fuel
supplement) (i.e., routed to combustion,
you must calculate CH4, CO2, and N2O
emissions as specified in subpart C of
this part or as specified in paragraph (z)
of this section, as applicable.
(1) Calculation Method 1. If you
operate and maintain a continuous
emissions monitoring system (CEMS)
that has both a CO2 concentration
monitor and volumetric flow rate
monitor, you must calculate CO2
emissions under this subpart by
following the Tier 4 Calculation Method
and all associated calculation, quality
assurance, reporting, and recordkeeping
requirements for Tier 4 in subpart C of
this part (General Stationary Fuel
Combustion Sources). Alternatively, you
may follow the manufacturer’s
instructions or industry standard
practice. If a CO2 concentration monitor
and volumetric flow rate monitor are
not available, you may elect to install a
CO2 concentration monitor and a
volumetric flow rate monitor that
comply with all of the requirements
specified for the Tier 4 Calculation
Method in subpart C of this part
(General Stationary Fuel Combustion
Sources).
(2) Calculation Method 2. For CO2
emissions, if a CEMS is not available but
a vent meter is installed, use the CO2
composition and annual volume of vent
gas to calculate emissions using
Equation W–3 of this section. For CH4
emissions, if a vent meter is installed,
including the volumetric flow rate
monitor on a CEMS for CO2, use the CH4
composition and annual volume of vent
gas to calculate emissions using
Equation W–3 of this section.
Where:
Ea,i = Annual total volumetric GHGi (either
CO2 or CH4) emissions at actual
conditions, in cubic feet per year.
Va = Total annual volume of vent gas flowing
out of the AGR or NRU in cubic feet per
year at actual conditions as determined
by flow meter using methods set forth in
§ 98.234(b). Alternatively, you may
follow the manufacturer’s instructions or
industry standard practice for calibration
of the vent meter.
Voli = Annual average volumetric fraction of
GHGi (either CO2 or CH4) content in vent
gas flowing out of the AGR or NRU as
determined in paragraph (d)(7) of this
section.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00107
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(3) Calculation Method 3. If a CEMS
for CO2 or a vent meter is not installed,
you may use the inlet and/or outlet gas
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
EP01AU23.007
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
CH4 and CO2 content of the vent gas are
known, use Equation W–4A. If outlet
gas flow rate and CH4 and CO2 content
of the vent gas are known, use Equation
W–4B. If inlet gas flow rate and outlet
gas flow rate are known, use Equation
W–4C.
Where:
Ea,i = Annual total volumetric GHGi (either
CH4 or CO2) emissions at actual
conditions, in cubic feet per year.
Vin = Total annual volume of natural gas flow
into the AGR or NRU in cubic feet per
year at actual conditions as determined
using methods specified in paragraph
(d)(5) of this section.
Vout = Total annual volume of natural gas
flow out of the AGR or NRU in cubic feet
per year at actual conditions as
determined using methods specified in
paragraph (d)(5) of this section.
VolI,i = Annual average volumetric fraction of
GHGi (either CH4 or CO2) content in
natural gas flowing into the AGR or NRU
as determined in paragraph (d)(7) of this
section.
VolO,i = Annual average volumetric fraction
of GHGi (either CH4 or CO2) content in
natural gas flowing out of the AGR or
NRU as determined in paragraph (d)(8)
of this section.
VolEM,i = Annual average volumetric fraction
of GHGi (either CH4 or CO2) content in
the vent gas flowing out of the AGR or
NRU as determined in paragraph (d)(6)
of this section.
knowledge based on best available data
and, if necessary, adjust parameters to
represent the operating conditions over
the time period covered by the
simulation. Determine the number of
simulations and associated time periods
such that the simulations cover the
entire reporting year (i.e., if you
calculate emissions using one
simulation, use representative
parameters for the operating conditions
over the calendar year; if you use
periodic simulations to cover the
calendar year, use parameters for the
operating conditions over each
corresponding appropriate portion of
the calendar year).
(i) Natural gas feed temperature,
pressure, and flow rate (must be
measured).
(ii) Acid gas content of feed natural
gas (must be measured).
(iii) Acid gas content of outlet natural
gas.
(iv) CH4 content of feed natural gas
(must be measured).
(v) CH4 content of outlet natural gas.
(vi) For NRU, nitrogen content of feed
natural gas (must be measured).
(vii) For NRU, nitrogen content of
outlet natural gas.
(viii) Unit operating hours, excluding
downtime for maintenance or standby.
(ix) Exit temperature of natural gas.
(x) For AGR, solvent type, pressure,
temperature, circulation rate, and
composition.
(5) Flow rate of inlet. For Calculation
Method 3, determine the gas flow rate
of the inlet when using Equation W–4A
or W–4C of this section or the gas flow
rate of the outlet when using Equation
W–4B or W–4C of this section for the
natural gas stream of an AGR or NRU
using a meter according to methods set
forth in § 98.234(b). If you do not have
a continuous flow meter, either install a
continuous flow meter or use an
engineering calculation to determine the
flow rate.
(6) Composition of vent gas. For
Calculation Method 2 or Calculation
Method 3 when using Equation W–4A
or W–4B of this section, if a continuous
gas analyzer is not available on the vent
stack, either install a continuous gas
analyzer or take quarterly gas samples
from the vent gas stream for each
quarter that the AGR or NRU is
operating to determine Voli in Equation
W–3 of this section or Equation W–4A
or W–4B of this section, according to the
methods set forth in § 98.234(b).
(7) Composition of inlet gas stream.
For Calculation Method 3, if a
continuous gas analyzer is installed on
the inlet gas stream, then the continuous
gas analyzer results must be used. If a
continuous gas analyzer is not available,
either install a continuous gas analyzer
or take quarterly gas samples from the
inlet gas stream for each quarter that the
AGR or NRU is operating to determine
VolI,i in Equation W–4A, W–4B, or W–
4C of this section, according to the
methods set forth in § 98.234(b).
(8) Composition of outlet gas stream.
For Calculation Method 3, determine
annual average volumetric fraction of
GHGi (either CH4 or CO2) content in
natural gas flowing out of the AGR or
NRU using one of the methods specified
in paragraphs (d)(8)(i) through (iii) of
this section.
(i) If a continuous gas analyzer is
installed on the outlet natural gas
stream, then the continuous gas
analyzer results must be used. If a
continuous gas analyzer is not available,
you may install a continuous gas
analyzer.
(ii) If a continuous gas analyzer is not
available or installed, quarterly gas
samples may be taken from the outlet
natural gas stream for each quarter that
the AGR or NRU is operating to
(4) Calculation Method 4. If CEMS for
CO2 or a vent meter is not installed, you
may calculate CH4 and CO2 emissions
from an AGR or NRU using any
standard simulation software package,
such as AspenTech HYSYS®, or API
4679 AMINECalc, that uses the PengRobinson equation of state and speciates
CH4 and CO2 emissions. A minimum of
the parameters listed in paragraph
(d)(4)(i) through (x) of this section, as
applicable, must be used to characterize
emissions. If paragraph (d)(4)(i) through
(x) of this section indicates that an
applicable parameter must be measured,
collect measurements reflective of
representative operating conditions over
the time period covered by the
simulation. Determine all other
applicable parameters in paragraph
(d)(4)(i) through (x) of this section by
engineering estimate and process
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00108
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
EP01AU23.009
flow rate of the AGR or NRU to calculate
emissions for CH4 and CO2 using
Equations W–4A, W–4B, or W–4C of
this section. If inlet gas flow rate and
EP01AU23.010
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
EP01AU23.008
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50388
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
determine VolO,i in Equation W–4A, W–
4B, or W–4C of this section, according
to the methods set forth in § 98.234(b).
(iii) If a continuous gas analyzer is not
available or installed, you may use the
outlet pipeline quality specification for
CO2 in natural gas and the outlet quality
specification for CH4 in natural gas.
(9) Volumetric emissions. Calculate
annual volumetric CH4 and CO2
emissions at standard conditions using
calculations in paragraph (t) of this
section.
(10) Mass emissions. Calculate annual
mass CH4 and CO2 emissions using
calculations in paragraph (v) of this
section.
(11) Emissions recovered and
transferred outside the facility.
Determine if CO2 emissions from the
AGR are recovered and transferred
outside the facility. Adjust the CO2
emissions estimated in paragraphs (d)(1)
through (d)(10) of this section
downward by the magnitude of CO2
emissions recovered and transferred
outside the facility.
(e) Dehydrator vents. For dehydrator
vents, calculate annual CH4 and CO2
emissions using the applicable
calculation methods described in
paragraphs (e)(1) through (5) of this
section. For glycol dehydrators that
have an annual average daily natural gas
throughput that is greater than or equal
to 0.4 million standard cubic feet per
day, use Calculation Method 1 in
paragraph (e)(1) of this section. For
glycol dehydrators that have an annual
average of daily natural gas throughput
that is greater than 0 million standard
cubic feet per day and less than 0.4
million standard cubic feet per day, use
either Calculation Method 1 in
paragraph (e)(1) of this section or
Calculation Method 2 in paragraph
(e)(2) of this section. If you are required
to or elect to use the method in
paragraph (e)(1) of this section, you
must use the results of the model to
determine annual mass emissions. If
emissions from dehydrator vents are
routed to a vapor recovery system, you
must adjust the emissions downward
according to paragraph (e)(4) of this
section. If emissions from dehydrator
vents are routed to a regenerator firebox/
fire tubes, you must calculate CH4, CO2,
and N2O annual emissions as specified
in paragraph (e)(5) of this section. If any
dehydrator vents are routed to a flare,
you must calculate CH4, CO2, and N2O
emissions for the flare stack as specified
in paragraph (n) of this section and
report emissions from the flare as
specified in § 98.236(n).
(1) Calculation Method 1. Calculate
annual mass emissions from glycol
dehydrators by using a software
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
program, such as AspenTech HYSYS®,
Bryan Research & Engineering ProMax®,
or GRI–GLYCalcTM, that uses the PengRobinson equation of state to calculate
the equilibrium coefficient, speciates
CH4 and CO2 emissions from
dehydrators, and has provisions to
include regenerator control devices, a
separator flash tank, stripping gas, and
a gas injection pump or gas assist pump.
If you elect to use ProMax®, you must
use version 5.0 or above. Emissions
must be modeled from both the still
vent and, if applicable, the flash tank
vent. A minimum of the parameters
listed in paragraph (e)(1)(i) through (xi)
of this section, as applicable, must be
used to characterize emissions. If
paragraph (e)(1)(i) through (xi) of this
section indicates that an applicable
parameter must be measured, collect
measurements reflective of
representative operating conditions for
the time period covered by the
simulation. Determine all other
applicable parameters in paragraph
(e)(1)(i) through (xi) of this section by
engineering estimate and process
knowledge based on best available data
and, if necessary, adjust parameters to
represent the operating conditions over
the time period covered by the
simulation. Determine the number of
simulations and associated time periods
such that the simulations cover the
entire reporting year (i.e., if you
calculate emissions using one
simulation, use representative
parameters for the operating conditions
over the calendar year; if you use
periodic simulations to cover the
calendar year, use parameters for the
operating conditions over each
corresponding appropriate portion of
the calendar year).
(i) Feed natural gas flow rate (must be
measured).
(ii) Feed natural gas water content
(must be measured).
*
*
*
*
*
(x) Wet natural gas temperature and
pressure at the absorber inlet (must be
measured).
(xi) Wet natural gas composition.
Measure this parameter using one of the
methods described in paragraphs
(e)(1)(xi)(A) and (B) of this section.
(A) Use an appropriate standard
method published by a consensus-based
standards organization if such a method
exists or you may use an industry
standard practice as specified in
§ 98.234(b) to sample and analyze wet
natural gas composition.
(B) If only composition data for dry
natural gas is available, assume the wet
natural gas is saturated.
(2) Calculation Method 2. Calculate
annual volumetric emissions from
PO 00000
Frm 00109
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50389
glycol dehydrators using Equation W–5
of this section, and then calculate the
collective CH4 and CO2 mass emissions
from the volumetric emissions using the
procedures in paragraph (v) of this
section:
*
*
*
*
*
Count = Total number of glycol
dehydrators that have an annual
average daily natural gas
throughput that is greater than 0
million standard cubic feet per day
and less than 0.4 million standard
cubic feet per day for which you
elect to use this Calculation Method
2.
*
*
*
*
*
(3) Calculation Method 3. For
dehydrators of any size that use
desiccant, you must calculate emissions
from the amount of gas vented from the
vessel when it is depressurized for the
desiccant refilling process using
Equation W–6 of this section. From
volumetric natural gas emissions,
calculate both CH4 and CO2 volumetric
and mass emissions using the
procedures in paragraphs (u) and (v) of
this section. Desiccant dehydrator
emissions covered in this paragraph do
not have to be calculated separately
using the method specified in paragraph
(i) of this section for blowdown vent
stacks.
*
*
*
*
*
(4) Emissions vented directly to
atmosphere from dehydrators routed to
a vapor recovery system, flare, or
regenerator firebox/fire tubes. If the
dehydrator(s) has a vapor recovery
system, routes emissions to a flare, or
routes emissions to a regenerator
firebox/fire tubes and you use
Calculation Method 1 or Calculation
Method 2 in paragraph (e)(1) or (2) of
this section, calculate annual emissions
vented directly to atmosphere from the
dehydrator(s) during periods of time
when emissions were not routed to the
vapor recovery system, flare, or
regenerator firebox/fire tubes as
specified in paragraphs (e)(4)(i) and (ii)
of this section. If the dehydrator(s) has
a vapor recovery system or routes
emissions to a flare and you use
Calculation Method 3 in paragraph
(e)(3) of this section, calculate annual
emissions vented directly to atmosphere
from the dehydrator(s) during periods of
time when emissions were not routed to
the vapor recovery system or flare as
specified in paragraph (e)(4)(iii) of this
section.
(i) When emissions from
dehydrator(s) are calculated using
Calculation Method 1 or 2, calculate
maximum potential annual vented
emissions as specified in paragraph
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
(e)(1) or (2) of this section, and calculate
an average hourly vented emissions rate
by dividing the maximum potential
annual vented emissions by the number
of hours that the dehydrator was in
operation.
(ii) To calculate total emissions
vented directly to atmosphere during
periods when the dehydrator was not
routing emissions to a vapor recovery
system, flare, or regenerator firebox/fire
tubes for dehydrator(s) with emissions
calculated using Calculation Method 1
or 2, multiply the average hourly vented
emissions rate determined in paragraph
(e)(4)(i) of this section by the number of
hours that the dehydrator vented
directly to the atmosphere. Determine
the number of hours that the dehydrator
vented directly to atmosphere by
subtracting the hours that the
dehydrator was connected to a vapor
recovery system, flare, or regenerator
firebox/fire tubes (based on engineering
estimate and best available data) from
the total operating hours for the
dehydrator in the calendar year. You
must take into account periods with
reduced capture efficiency of the vapor
recovery system, flare, or regenerator
firebox/fire tubes. If emissions are
routed to a flare but the flare is unlit,
calculate emissions in accordance with
the methodology specified in paragraph
(n) of this section and report emissions
from the flare as specified in
§ 98.236(n).
(iii) When emissions from
dehydrator(s) are calculated using
Calculation Method 3, calculate total
annual emissions vented directly to
atmosphere from the dehydrator(s)
during periods of time when emissions
were not routed to the vapor recovery
system, flare, or regenerator firebox/fire
tubes by determining of the number of
depressurization events (including
portions of an event) that vented to
atmosphere based on engineering
estimate and best available data. You
must take into account periods with
reduced capture efficiency of the vapor
recovery system or flare. If emissions are
routed to a flare but the flare is unlit,
calculate emissions in accordance with
the methodology specified in paragraph
(n) of this section and report emissions
from the flare as specified in
§ 98.236(n).
(5) Combustion emissions from
routing to regenerator firebox/fire tubes.
If any dehydrator emissions are routed
to a regenerator firebox/fire tubes,
calculate emissions from these devices
attributable to dehydrator flash tank
vents or still vents as specified in
paragraphs (e)(5)(i) through (iii) of this
section. If you operate a CEMS to
monitor the emissions from the
regenerator firebox/fire tubes, calculate
emissions as specified in paragraph
(e)(5)(iv) of this section.
(i) Determine the volume of the total
emissions that is routed to a regenerator
firebox/fire tubes as specified in
paragraph (e)(5)(i)(A) or (B) of this
section.
(A) Measure the flow from the
dehydrator(s) to the regenerator firebox/
fire tubes using a continuous flow
measurement device. If you
continuously measure flow to the
regenerator firebox/fire tubes, you must
use the measured volumes to calculate
emissions from the regenerator firebox/
fire tubes.
(B) Using engineering estimates based
on best available data, determine the
volume of the total emissions estimated
in paragraph (e)(1), (2), or (3) of this
section, as applicable, that is routed to
the regenerator firebox/fire tubes.
(ii) Determine composition of the gas
routed to a regenerator firebox/fire tubes
as specified in paragraph (e)(5)(ii)(A) or
(B) of this section.
(A) Use the appropriate vent
emissions as determined in paragraph
(e)(1) or (2) of this section.
(B) Measure the composition of the
gas from the dehydrator(s) to the
regenerator firebox/fire tubes using a
continuous composition analyzer. If you
continuously measure gas composition,
then those measured data must be used
to calculate dehydrator emissions from
the regenerator firebox/fire tubes.
(iii) Determine GHG volumetric
emissions at actual conditions from the
regenerator firebox/fire tubes using
Equations W–39A, W–39B, and W–40 in
paragraph (z)(3) of this section.
Calculate GHG volumetric emissions at
standard conditions using calculations
in paragraph (t) of this section. Calculate
both GHG mass emissions from
volumetric emissions using calculations
in paragraph (v) of this section.
(iv) If you operate and maintain a
CEMS that has both a CO2 concentration
monitor and volumetric flow rate
monitor for the combustion gases from
Where:
Ea = Annual natural gas emissions for each
well of the same tubing diameter group
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00110
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
the regenerator firebox/fire tubes, you
must calculate only CO2 emissions for
the regenerator firebox/fire tubes. You
must follow the Tier 4 Calculation
Method and all associated calculation,
quality assurance, reporting, and
recordkeeping requirements for Tier 4 in
subpart C of this part (General
Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources). If
a CEMS is used to calculate emissions
from a regenerator firebox/fire tubes, the
requirements specified in paragraphs
(e)(5)(ii) and (iii) of this section are not
required.
(f) Well venting for liquids
unloadings. Calculate annual volumetric
natural gas emissions from well venting
for liquids unloading when the well is
unloaded to the atmosphere or a control
device using one of the calculation
methods described in paragraph (f)(1),
(2), or (3) of this section. Once every 3
consecutive calendar years or on a more
frequent basis, you must use Calculation
Method 1 to calculate emissions from
well venting for liquids unloading for
each well. Calculate annual CH4 and
CO2 volumetric and mass emissions
using the method described in
paragraph (f)(4) of this section.
(1) Calculation Method 1. Calculate
emissions from manual and automated
unloadings at wells with plunger lifts
and wells without plunger lifts
separately. For at least one well of each
unique well tubing diameter group and
pressure group combination in each
sub-basin category (see § 98.238 for the
definitions of tubing diameter group,
pressure group, and sub-basin category),
where gas wells are vented to the
atmosphere to expel liquids
accumulated in the tubing, install a
recording flow meter on the vent line
used to vent gas from the well (e.g., on
the vent line off the wellhead separator
or atmospheric storage tank) according
to methods set forth in § 98.234(b).
Calculate the total emissions from well
venting to the atmosphere for liquids
unloading using Equation W–7A of this
section. Equation W–7A must be used
for each unloading type combination
(automated plunger lift unloadings,
manual plunger lift unloadings,
automated unloadings without plunger
lifts and manual unloadings without
plunger lifts) for any tubing diameter
group and pressure group combination
in each sub-basin.
and pressure group combination in the
sub-basin at actual conditions, a, in
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
EP01AU23.011
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50390
cubic feet. Calculate emissions from
wells with automated plunger lift
unloadings, wells with manual plunger
lift unloadings, wells with automated
unloadings without plunger lifts and
wells with manual unloadings without
plunger lifts separately.
FR = Average flow rate in cubic feet per hour
for all measured wells of the same tubing
diameter group and pressure group
combination in a sub-basin, over the
duration of the liquids unloading, under
actual conditions as determined in
paragraph (f)(1)(i) of this section.
Tp = Cumulative amount of time in hours of
venting for each well, p, of the same
tubing diameter group and pressure
group combination in a sub-basin during
the year. If the available venting data do
not contain a record of the date of the
venting events and data are not available
to provide the venting hours for the
specific time period of January 1 to
December 31, you may calculate an
annualized vent time, Tp, using Equation
W–7B of this section.
Where:
HRp = Cumulative amount of time in hours
of venting for each well, p, during the
monitoring period.
MPp = Time period, in days, of the
monitoring period for each well, p. A
minimum of 300 days in a calendar year
are required. The next period of data
collection must start immediately
following the end of data collection for
the previous reporting year.
Dp = Time period, in days during which the
well, p, was in production (365 if the
well was in production for the entire
year).
(i) Determine the well vent average
flow rate (‘‘FR’’ in Equation W–7A of
this section) as specified in paragraphs
(f)(1)(i)(A) through (C) of this section for
at least one well in a unique well tubing
diameter group and pressure group
combination in each sub-basin category.
Calculate emissions from wells with
automated plunger lift unloadings, wells
with manual plunger lift unloadings,
wells with automated unloadings
without plunger lifts and wells with
manual unloadings without plunger lifts
separately.
(A) Calculate the average flow rate per
hour of venting for each unique tubing
diameter group and pressure group
combination in each sub-basin category
by dividing the recorded total annual
flow by the recorded time (in hours) for
all measured liquid unloading events
with venting to the atmosphere or a
control device.
(B) Apply the average hourly flow rate
calculated under paragraph (f)(1)(i)(A)
of this section to each well in the same
pressure group that have the same
tubing diameter group, for the number
of hours of each well is vented.
(C) If using Calculation Method 1
more frequently than once every 3 years,
you must calculate a new average flow
rate each calendar year that you use
Calculation Method 1. For a new
producing sub-basin category, calculate
an average flow rate beginning in the
first year of production.
(ii) Calculate natural gas volumetric
emissions at standard conditions using
calculations in paragraph (t) of this
section.
(2) Calculation Method 2. Calculate
the total emissions for each well from
manual and automated well venting to
the atmosphere for liquids unloading
without plunger lift assist using
Equation W–8 of this section.
Where:
Es = Annual natural gas emissions for each
well at standard conditions, s, in cubic
feet per year
Np = Total number of unloading events in the
monitoring period per well, p.
0.37 × 10¥3 = {3.14 (pi)/4}/{14.7*144} (psia
converted to pounds per square feet).
CDp = Casing internal diameter for well, p,
in inches.
WDp = Well depth from either the top of the
well or the lowest packer to the bottom
of the well, for well, p, in feet.
SPp = For well, p, shut-in pressure or
surface pressure for wells with tubing
production, or casing pressure for each well
with no packers, in pounds per square inch
absolute (psia). If casing pressure is not
available for the well, you may determine the
casing pressure by multiplying the tubing
pressure of the well with a ratio of casing
pressure to tubing pressure from a well in the
same sub-basin for which the casing pressure
is known. The tubing pressure must be
measured during gas flow to a flow-line. The
shut-in pressure, surface pressure, or casing
pressure must be determined just prior to
liquids unloading when the well production
is impeded by liquids loading or closed to
the flow-line by surface valves.
SFRp = Average flow-line rate of gas for well,
p, at standard conditions in cubic feet
per hour. Use Equation W–33 of this
section to calculate the average flow-line
rate at standard conditions.
HRp,q = Hours that well, p, was left open to
the atmosphere during each unloading
event, q.
1.0 = Hours for average well to blowdown
casing volume at shut-in pressure.
q = Unloading event.
Zp,q = If HRp,q is less than 1.0 then Zp,q is
equal to 0. If HRp,q is greater than or
equal to 1.0 then Zp,q is equal to 1.
EP01AU23.013
(3) Calculation Method 3. Calculate
the total emissions for each sub-basin
from well venting to the atmosphere for
liquids unloading with plunger lift
assist using Equation W–9 of this
section.
EP01AU23.014
50391
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00111
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
EP01AU23.012
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
Where:
Es = Annual natural gas emissions for each
well at standard conditions, s, in cubic
feet per year.
Np = Total number of unloading events in the
monitoring period per well, p.
0.37 × 10¥3 = {3.14 (pi)/4}/{14.7*144} (psia
converted to pounds per square feet).
TDp = Tubing internal diameter for well, p,
in inches.
WDp = Tubing depth to plunger bumper for
well, p, in feet.
SPp = Flow-line pressure for well p in
pounds per square inch absolute (psia),
using engineering estimate based on best
available data.
SFRp = Average flow-line rate of gas for well,
p, at standard conditions in cubic feet
per hour. Use Equation W–33 of this
section to calculate the average flow-line
rate at standard conditions.
HRp,q = Hours that well, p, was left open to
the atmosphere during each unloading
event, q.
0.5 = Hours for average well to blowdown
tubing volume at flow-line pressure.
q = Unloading event.
Zp,q = If HRp,q is less than 0.5 then Zp,q is
equal to 0. If HRp,q is greater than or
equal to 0.5 then Zp,q is equal to 1.
(4) Volumetric and mass emissions.
Calculate CH4 and CO2 volumetric and
mass emissions from volumetric natural
gas emissions using calculations in
paragraphs (u) and (v) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(g) Well venting during completions
and workovers with hydraulic
fracturing. Calculate annual volumetric
natural gas emissions from gas well and
oil well venting during completions and
workovers involving hydraulic
fracturing using Equation W–10A or
Equation W–10B of this section.
Equation W–10A applies to well venting
when the gas flowback rate is measured
from a specified number of example
completions or workovers in a sub-basin
and well type combination and
Equation W–10B applies when the gas
flowback vent or flare volume is
measured for each completion or
workover in a sub-basin and well type
combination. Completion and workover
activities are separated into two periods,
an initial period when flowback is
routed to open pits or tanks and a
subsequent period when gas content is
sufficient to route the flowback to a
separator or when the gas content is
sufficient to allow measurement by the
devices specified in paragraph (g)(1) of
this section, regardless of whether a
separator is actually utilized. If you
elect to use Equation W–10A, you must
follow the procedures specified in
paragraph (g)(1) of this section. If you
elect to use Equation W–10B, you must
use a recording flow meter installed on
the vent line, downstream of a separator
and ahead of a flare or vent, to measure
the gas flowback. For either equation,
emissions must be calculated separately
for completions and workovers, for each
sub-basin, and for each well type
combination identified in paragraph
(g)(2) of this section. You must calculate
CH4 and CO2 volumetric and mass
emissions as specified in paragraph
(g)(3) of this section. If emissions from
well venting during completions and
workovers with hydraulic fracturing are
routed to a flare, you must calculate
CH4, CO2, and N2O annual emissions as
specified in paragraph (n) of this
section.
Where:
Es,n = Annual volumetric natural gas
emissions in standard cubic feet from gas
venting during well completions or
workovers following hydraulic fracturing
for each well.
CW = Total number of completions or
workovers using hydraulic fracturing for
each well, p.
Tp,s,cw = Cumulative amount of time of
flowback, after sufficient quantities of
gas are present to enable separation,
where gas vented or flared for each
completion or workover, in hours, for
each well, p, during the reporting year.
This may include non-contiguous
periods of venting or flaring.
Tp,i,cw = Cumulative amount of time of
flowback to open tanks/pits, from when
gas is first detected until sufficient
quantities of gas are present to enable
separation, for each completion or
workover, in hours, for each well, p,
during the reporting year. This may
include non-contiguous periods of
routing to open tanks/pits but does not
include periods when the oil well ceases
to produce fluids to the surface.
FRMs = Ratio of average gas flowback, during
the period when sufficient quantities of
gas are present to enable separation, of
well completions and workovers from
hydraulic fracturing to 30-day
production rate for the sub-basin and
well type combination, calculated using
procedures specified in paragraph
(g)(1)(iii) of this section.
FRMi = Ratio of initial gas flowback rate
during well completions and workovers
from hydraulic fracturing to 30-day gas
production rate for the sub-basin and
well type combination, calculated using
procedures specified in paragraph
(g)(1)(iv) of this section, for the period of
flow to open tanks/pits.
PRs,p,cw = Average gas production flow rate
during the first 30 days of production
after each completion of a newly drilled
well or well workover using hydraulic
fracturing in standard cubic feet per hour
of each well p, that was measured in the
sub-basin and well type combination. If
applicable, PRs,p,cw may be calculated for
oil wells using procedures specified in
paragraph (g)(1)(vii) of this section.
EnFs,p,cw = Volume of N2 injected gas in cubic
feet at standard conditions that was
injected into the reservoir during an
energized fracture job or during flowback
during each completion or workover for
each well, p, as determined by using an
appropriate meter according to methods
described in § 98.234(b), or by using
receipts of gas purchases that are used
for the energized fracture job or injection
during flowback. Convert to standard
conditions using paragraph (t) of this
section. If the fracture process did not
inject gas into the reservoir or if the
injected gas is CO2 then EnFs,p,cw is 0.
FVs,p,cw = Flow volume of vented or flared gas
for each completion or workover at each
well, p, in standard cubic feet measured
using a recording flow meter (digital or
analog) on the vent line to measure gas
flowback during the separation period of
the completion or workover according to
methods set forth in § 98.234(b).
FRp,i,cw = Flow rate vented or flared of each
completion or workover for each well, p,
in standard cubic feet per hour measured
using a recording flow meter (digital or
analog) on the vent line to measure the
flowback, at the beginning of the period
of time when sufficient quantities of gas
are present to enable separation, of the
completion or workover according to
methods set forth in § 98.234(b).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00112
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
EP01AU23.016
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
EP01AU23.015
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50392
(1) If you elect to use Equation W–
10A of this section on gas wells, you
must use Calculation Method 1 as
specified in paragraph (g)(1)(i) of this
section to determine the value of FRMs
and FRMi. These values must be based
on the flow rate for flowback gases, once
sufficient gas is present to enable
separation. The number of
measurements or calculations required
to estimate FRMs and FRMi must be
determined individually for
completions and workovers per subbasin and well type combination as
follows: Complete measurements or
calculations for at least one completion
or workover for less than or equal to 25
completions or workovers for each well
type combination within a sub-basin;
complete measurements or calculations
for at least two completions or
workovers for 26 to 50 completions or
workovers for each sub-basin and well
type combination; complete
measurements or calculations for at
least three completions or workovers for
51 to 100 completions or workovers for
each sub-basin and well type
combination; complete measurements or
calculations for at least four
completions or workovers for 101 to 250
completions or workovers for each subbasin and well type combination; and
complete measurements or calculations
for at least five completions or
workovers for greater than 250
completions or workovers for each subbasin and well type combination.
*
*
*
*
*
(iii) * * *
FRs,p = Measured average gas flowback
rate from Calculation Method 1
described in paragraph (g)(1)(i) of
this section, during the separation
period in standard cubic feet per
hour for well(s) p for each sub-basin
and well type combination. Convert
measured FRa values from actual
conditions upstream of the
restriction orifice (FRa) to standard
conditions (FRs,p) for each well p
using Equation W–33 in paragraph
(t) of this section. You may not use
flow volume as used in Equation
W–10B of this section converted to
a flow rate for this parameter.
*
*
*
*
*
N = Number of measured well
completions or workovers using
hydraulic fracturing in a sub-basin
and well type combination.
(iv) * * *
FRi,p = Initial measured gas flowback
rate from Calculation Method 1
described in paragraph (g)(1)(i) of
this section in standard cubic feet
per hour for well(s), p, for each subbasin and well type combination.
Measured FRi,p values must be
based on flow conditions at the
beginning of the separation period
and must be expressed at standard
conditions.
*
*
*
*
*
N = Number of measured well
completions or workovers using
hydraulic fracturing in a sub-basin
and well type combination.
*
*
*
*
*
(h) Gas well venting during
completions and workovers without
hydraulic fracturing. Calculate annual
volumetric natural gas emissions from
each gas well venting during workovers
without hydraulic fracturing using
Equation W–13A of this section.
Calculate annual volumetric natural gas
emissions from each gas well venting
during completions without hydraulic
fracturing using Equation W–13B of this
section. You must convert annual
volumetric natural gas emissions to CH4
and CO2 volumetric and mass emissions
as specified in paragraph (h)(1) of this
section. If emissions from gas well
venting during completions and
workovers without hydraulic fracturing
are routed to a flare, you must calculate
CH4, CO2, and N2O annual emissions as
specified in paragraph (n) of this
section.
Where:
Es,wo = Annual volumetric natural gas
emissions in standard cubic feet from gas
well venting during well workovers
without hydraulic fracturing.
Nwo = Number of workovers per well that do
not involve hydraulic fracturing in the
reporting year.
EFwo = Emission factor for non-hydraulic
fracture well workover venting in
standard cubic feet per workover. Use
3,114 standard cubic feet natural gas per
well workover without hydraulic
fracturing.
Es,p = Annual volumetric natural gas
emissions in standard cubic feet from gas
well venting during well completions
without hydraulic fracturing.
Vp = Average daily gas production rate in
standard cubic feet per hour for each
well, p, undergoing completion without
hydraulic fracturing. This is the total
annual gas production volume divided
by total number of hours the well
produced to the flow-line. For completed
wells that have not established a
production rate, you may use the average
flow rate from the first 30 days of
production. In the event that the well is
completed less than 30 days from the
end of the calendar year, the first 30 days
of the production straddling the current
and following calendar years shall be
used.
Tp = Time that gas is vented to either the
atmosphere or a flare for each well, p,
undergoing completion without
hydraulic fracturing, in hours during the
year.
types for each industry segment as
specified in paragraph (i)(2)(iv) of this
section.
(i) * * *
Ta = Temperature at actual conditions in
the unique physical volume (°F).
For emergency blowdowns at
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production, onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities, onshore natural gas
transmission pipeline facilities, and
natural gas distribution facilities,
engineering estimates based on best
available information may be used
to determine the temperature.
*
*
*
*
*
Pa = Absolute pressure at actual
conditions in the unique physical
volume (psia). For emergency
blowdowns at onshore petroleum
and natural gas production, onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering
and boosting facilities, onshore
natural gas transmission pipeline
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:13 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
*
*
*
*
*
(i) * * *
(2) Method for determining emissions
from blowdown vent stacks according to
equipment or event type. If you elect to
determine emissions according to each
equipment or event type, using unique
physical volumes as calculated in
paragraph (i)(1) of this section, you must
calculate emissions as specified in
paragraph (i)(2)(i) of this section and
either paragraph (i)(2)(ii) of this section
or, if applicable, paragraph (i)(2)(iii) of
this section for each equipment or event
type. Categorize equipment and event
PO 00000
Frm 00113
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
EP01au23.018
50393
EP01au23.017
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50394
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
facilities, and natural gas
distribution facilities, engineering
estimates based on best available
information may be used to
determine the pressure.
*
*
*
*
*
Ta,p = Temperature at actual conditions
in the unique physical volume (°F)
for each blowdown ‘‘p’’. For
emergency blowdowns at onshore
petroleum and natural gas
production, onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities, onshore natural gas
transmission pipeline facilities, and
natural gas distribution facilities,
engineering estimates based on best
available information may be used
to determine the temperature.
*
*
*
*
*
Pa,b,p = Absolute pressure at actual
conditions in the unique physical
volume (psia) at the beginning of
the blowdown ‘‘p’’. For emergency
blowdowns at onshore petroleum
and natural gas production, onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering
and boosting facilities, onshore
natural gas transmission pipeline
facilities, and natural gas
distribution facilities, engineering
estimates based on best available
information may be used to
determine the pressure at the
beginning of the blowdown.
Pa,e,p = Absolute pressure at actual
conditions in the unique physical
volume (psia) at the end of the
blowdown ‘‘p’’; 0 if blowdown
volume is purged using non-GHG
gases. For emergency blowdowns at
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production, onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities, onshore natural gas
transmission pipeline facilities, and
natural gas distribution facilities,
engineering estimates based on best
available information may be used
to determine the pressure at the end
of the blowdown.
*
*
*
*
*
(iv) Categorize blowdown vent stack
emission events as specified in
paragraphs (i)(2)(iv)(A) and (B) of this
section, as applicable.
(A) For the onshore petroleum and
natural gas production, onshore natural
gas processing, onshore natural gas
transmission compression, underground
natural gas storage, LNG storage, LNG
import and export equipment, and
onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting industry
segments, equipment or event types
must be grouped into the following
seven categories: Facility piping (i.e.,
physical volumes associated with
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
piping for which the entire physical
volume is located within the facility
boundary), pipeline venting (i.e.,
physical volumes associated with
pipelines for which a portion of the
physical volume is located outside the
facility boundary and the remainder,
including the blowdown vent stack, is
located within the facility boundary),
compressors, scrubbers/strainers, pig
launchers and receivers, emergency
shutdowns (this category includes
emergency shutdown blowdown
emissions regardless of equipment
type), and all other equipment with a
physical volume greater than or equal to
50 cubic feet. If a blowdown event
resulted in emissions from multiple
equipment types and the emissions
cannot be apportioned to the different
equipment types, then categorize the
blowdown event as the equipment type
that represented the largest portion of
the emissions for the blowdown event.
(B) For the onshore natural gas
transmission pipeline and natural gas
distribution industry segments, pipeline
segments or event types must be
grouped into the following eight
categories: Pipeline integrity work (e.g.,
the preparation work of modifying
facilities, ongoing assessments,
maintenance or mitigation), traditional
operations or pipeline maintenance,
equipment replacement or repair (e.g.,
valves), pipe abandonment, new
construction or modification of
pipelines including commissioning and
change of service, operational
precaution during activities (e.g.
excavation near pipelines), emergency
shutdowns including pipeline incidents
as defined in 49 CFR 191.3, and all
other pipeline segments with a physical
volume greater than or equal to 50 cubic
feet. If a blowdown event resulted in
emissions from multiple categories and
the emissions cannot be apportioned to
the different categories, then categorize
the blowdown event in the category that
represented the largest portion of the
emissions for the blowdown event.
*
*
*
*
*
(j) Hydrocarbon liquids and produced
water storage tanks. Calculate CH4, CO2,
and N2O (when flared) emissions from
atmospheric pressure storage tanks
receiving hydrocarbon liquids or
produced water from onshore petroleum
and natural gas production facilities,
onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facilities
(including stationary liquid storage not
owned or operated by the reporter), and
onshore natural gas processing facilities
as specified in this paragraph (j). For
wells, gas-liquid separators, or onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
PO 00000
Frm 00114
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
boosting or onshore natural gas
processing non-separator equipment
(e.g., stabilizers, slug catchers) with
annual average daily throughput of
hydrocarbon liquids greater than or
equal to 10 barrels per day, calculate
annual CH4 and CO2 using Calculation
Method 1 or 2 as specified in paragraphs
(j)(1) and (2) of this section. For wells,
gas-liquid separators, or non-separator
equipment with annual average daily
throughput of hydrocarbon liquids
greater than 0 barrels per day and less
than 10 barrels per day, calculate annual
CH4 and CO2 emissions using
Calculation Method 1, 2, or 3 as
specified in paragraphs (j)(1) through (3)
of this section. Annual average daily
throughput of hydrocarbon liquids
should be calculated using the flow out
of the separator, well, or non-separator
equipment determined over the actual
days of operation. For atmospheric
pressure storage tanks receiving
produced water, calculate annual CH4
emissions using Calculation Method 1,
2, or 3 as specified in paragraphs (j)(1)
through (3) of this section. If you are
required to or elect to use the method
in paragraph (j)(1) of this section, you
must use the results of the model to
determine annual CH4 and, if
applicable, CO2 emissions. If you use
Calculation Method 1 or Calculation
Method 2 for gas-liquid separators, you
must also calculate emissions that may
have occurred due to dump valves not
closing properly using the method
specified in paragraph (j)(5) of this
section. If emissions from atmospheric
pressure storage tanks are routed to a
vapor recovery system, you must
calculate CH4 and CO2 annual emissions
as specified in paragraph (j)(4) of this
section. If emissions from atmospheric
pressure storage tanks are routed to a
flare, determine flared emissions in
accordance with the methodology
specified in paragraph (n) of this section
and report emissions from the flare as
specified in § 98.236(n). For
atmospheric pressure storage tanks
routing emissions to a vapor recovery
system or a flare, calculate annual
emissions vented directly to atmosphere
as specified in paragraph (j)(4) of this
section.
(1) Calculation Method 1. For
atmospheric pressure storage tanks
receiving hydrocarbon liquids, calculate
annual CH4 and CO2 emissions using
operating conditions in the well, last
gas-liquid separator, or last nonseparator equipment before liquid
transfer to storage tanks. For
atmospheric pressure storage tanks
receiving produced water, calculate
annual CH4 emissions using operating
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50395
conditions in the well, last gas-liquid
separator, or last non-separator
equipment before liquid transfer to
storage tanks. Calculate flashing
emissions with a software program,
such as AspenTech HYSYS®, Bryan
Research & Engineering ProMax®, or, for
atmospheric pressure storage tanks
receiving hydrocarbon liquids from gasliquid separator or non-separator
equipment, API 4697 E&P Tank, that
uses the Peng-Robinson equation of
state, models flashing emissions, and
speciates CH4 and CO2 emissions that
will result when the hydrocarbon
liquids or produced water from the well,
separator, or non-separator equipment
enter an atmospheric pressure storage
tank. If you elect to use ProMax®, you
must use version 5.0 or above. A
minimum of the parameters listed in
paragraphs (j)(1)(i) through (vii) of this
section, as applicable, must be used to
characterize emissions. If paragraphs
(j)(1)(i) through (vii) of this section
indicates that an applicable parameter
must be measured, collect
measurements reflective of
representative operating conditions for
the time period covered by the
simulation. Determine all other
applicable parameters in paragraphs
(j)(1)(i) through (vii) of this section by
engineering estimate and process
knowledge based on best available data
and, if necessary, adjust parameters to
represent the operating conditions over
the time period covered by the
simulation. Determine the number of
simulations and associated time periods
such that the simulations cover the
entire reporting year (i.e., if you
calculate emissions using one
simulation, use representative
parameters for the operating conditions
over the calendar year; if you use
periodic simulations to cover the
calendar year, use parameters for the
operating conditions over each
corresponding appropriate portion of
the calendar year).
(i) Well, separator, or non-separator
equipment temperature (must be
measured).
(ii) Well, separator, or non-separator
equipment pressure (must be measured).
(iii) For atmospheric pressure storage
tanks receiving hydrocarbon liquids,
sales or stabilized hydrocarbon liquids
API gravity (must be measured).
(iv) Sales or stabilized hydrocarbon
liquids or produced water production
rate (must be measured).
(v) Ambient air temperature.
(vi) Ambient air pressure.
(vii) Well, separator, or non-separator
equipment hydrocarbon liquids or
produced water composition and Reid
vapor pressure (must be measured). Use
an appropriate standard method
published by a consensus-based
standards organization if such a method
exists or you may use an industry
standard practice as specified in
§ 98.234(b) to sample and analyze
hydrocarbon liquids or produced water
composition and Reid vapor pressure.
(2) Calculation Method 2. For
atmospheric pressure storage tanks
receiving hydrocarbon liquids, calculate
annual CH4 and CO2 emissions using
the methods in paragraph (j)(2)(i) of this
section. For atmospheric pressure
storage tanks receiving produced water,
calculate annual CH4 emissions using
the methods in paragraph (j)(2)(i) of this
section.
(i) Assume that all of the CH4 and, if
applicable, CO2 in solution at well,
separator, or non-separator equipment
temperature and pressure is emitted
from hydrocarbon liquids or produced
water sent to atmosphere pressure
storage tanks. You may use an
appropriate standard method published
by a consensus-based standards
organization if such a method exists or
you may use an industry standard
practice as described in § 98.234(b) to
sample and analyze hydrocarbon liquids
or produced water composition at well,
separator, or non-separator pressure and
temperature.
(ii) [Reserved]
(3) Calculation Method 3. Calculate
CH4 and CO2 emissions from
atmospheric pressure storage tanks
receiving hydrocarbon liquids as
specified in paragraph (j)(3)(i) of this
section. Calculate CH4 emissions from
atmospheric pressure storage tanks
receiving produced water as specified in
paragraph (j)(3)(ii) of this section.
(i) Calculate CH4 and CO2 emissions
from atmospheric pressure storage tanks
receiving hydrocarbon liquids using
Equation W–15A of this section:
Where:
Es,i = Annual total volumetric GHG emissions
(either CO2 or CH4) at standard
conditions in cubic feet.
EFi = Population emission factor for
separators, wells, or non-separator
equipment in thousand standard cubic
feet per separator, well, or non-separator
equipment per year, for crude oil use 4.2
for CH4 and 2.8 for CO2 at 60 °F and 14.7
psia, and for gas condensate use 17.6 for
CH4 and 2.8 for CO2 at 60 °F and 14.7
psia.
Count = Total number of separators, wells, or
non-separator equipment with annual
average daily throughput greater than 0
barrels per day and less than 10 barrels
per day. Count only separators, wells, or
non-separator equipment that feed
hydrocarbon liquids directly to the
atmospheric pressure storage tank for
which you elect to use this Calculation
Method 3.
1,000 = Conversion from thousand standard
cubic feet to standard cubic feet.
Where:
MassCH4 = Annual total CH4 emissions in
metric tons.
EFCH4 = Population emission factor for
produced water in metric tons CH4 per
thousand barrels produced water per
year. For produced water streams from
separators, wells, or non-separator
equipment with pressure less than or
equal to 50 psi, use 0.0015. For produced
water streams from separators, wells, or
non-separator equipment with pressure
greater than 50 but less than or equal to
250 psi, use 0.0142. For produced water
streams from separators, wells, or nonseparator equipment with pressure
greater than 250 psi, use 0.0508. Pressure
should be representative of separators,
wells, or non-separator equipment that
feed produced water directly to the
atmosphere pressure storage tank.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00115
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
FR = Annual flow rate of produced water to
atmospheric pressure storage tanks, in
barrels.
0.001 = Conversion from barrels to thousand
barrels.
(4) Routing to vapor recovery systems
or flares. If the atmospheric pressure
storage tank receiving your hydrocarbon
liquids or produced water has a vapor
recovery system or routes emissions to
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
EP01AU23.020
(ii) Calculate CH4 emissions from
atmospheric pressure storage tanks
receiving produced water using
Equation W–15B of this section:
EP01AU23.019
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
a flare, calculate annual emissions
vented directly to atmosphere from the
storage tank during periods of time
when emissions were not routed to the
vapor recovery system or flare as
specified in paragraph (j)(4)(i) of this
section. Determine recovered mass as
specified in paragraph (j)(4)(ii) of this
section.
(i) For an atmospheric pressure
storage tank that routes any emissions to
a vapor recovery system or a flare,
calculate vented emissions as specified
in paragraphs (j)(4)(i)(A) through (E) of
this section.
(A) Calculate maximum potential
vented emissions as specified in
paragraph (j)(1), (2), or (3) of this
section, and calculate an average hourly
vented emissions rate by dividing the
maximum potential vented emissions by
the number of hours that the tank was
in operation.
(B) To calculate vented emissions
during periods when the tank was not
routing emissions to a vapor recovery
system or a flare, multiply the average
hourly vented emissions rate
determined in paragraph (j)(4)(i)(A) of
this section by the number of hours that
the tank vented directly to the
atmosphere. Determine the number of
hours that the tank vented directly to
atmosphere by subtracting the hours
that the tank was connected to a vapor
recovery system or flare (based on
engineering estimate and best available
data) from the total operating hours for
the tank in the calendar year. If
emissions are routed to a flare but the
flare is unlit, calculate emissions in
accordance with the methodology
specified in paragraph (n) of this section
and report emissions from the flare as
specified in § 98.236(n).
(C) During periods when a thief hatch
is open or not properly seated and
emissions from the tank are routed to a
vapor recovery system or a flare, assume
the capture efficiency of the vapor
recovery system or a flare is 0 percent.
To calculate vented emissions during
such periods, multiply the average
hourly vented emissions rate
determined in paragraph (j)(4)(i)(A) of
this section by the number of hours that
the thief hatch is open or not properly
seated. Determine the number of hours
that the thief hatch is open or not
properly seated as specified in
paragraph (j)(7) of this section.
(D) Calculate vented emissions not
captured by the vapor recovery system
or a flare due to causes other than open
or not properly seated thief hatches
based on best available data.
(E) Calculate total emissions vented
directly to atmosphere as the sum of the
emissions calculated as specified in
paragraphs (j)(4)(i)(B) through (D) of this
section.
(ii) Using engineering estimates based
on best available data, determine the
portion of the total emissions estimated
in paragraphs (j)(1) through (3) of this
section that is recovered using a vapor
recovery system. You must take into
account periods with reduced capture
efficiency of the vapor recovery system
(e.g., when a thief hatch is open or not
properly seated) when calculating mass
recovered as specified in paragraphs
(j)(4)(i)(C) and (D) of this section.
(5) Gas-liquid separator dump valves.
If you use Calculation Method 1 or
Calculation Method 2 in paragraph (j)(1)
or (2) of this section, calculate emissions
from occurrences of gas-liquid separator
liquid dump valves that did not close
properly during the calendar year by
using Equation W–16 of this section.
Determine the total time a dump valve
did not close properly in the calendar
year (Tdv) as specified in paragraph
(j)(5)(i) of this section.
Where:
Es,i,dv = Annual volumetric GHG emissions
(either CO2 or CH4) at standard
conditions in cubic feet from
atmospheric pressure storage tanks that
resulted from the dump valve on an
associated gas-liquid separator that did
not close properly.
CFdv = Correction factor for tank emissions
for time period Tdv is 2.87 for crude oil
production. Correction factor for tank
emissions for time period Tdv is 4.37 for
gas condensate production.
Es,i = Annual volumetric GHG emissions
(either CO2 or CH4) as determined in
paragraphs (j)(1) and (2) and, if
applicable, (j)(4) of this section, in
standard cubic feet per year, from
atmospheric pressure storage tanks with
dump valves on an associated gas-liquid
separator that did not close properly.
8,760 = Conversion to hourly emissions.
Tdv = Total time a dump valve did not close
properly in the calendar year as
determined in paragraph (j)(5)(i) of this
section, in hours.
paragraph (j)(5)(i)(A) and (B) of this
section.
(A) Visual inspections must be
conducted at least once in a calendar
year.
(B) If stuck gas-liquid separator liquid
dump valve is identified, the dump
valve must be counted as being open
since the beginning of the calendar year,
or from the previous visual inspection
that did not identify the dump valve as
being stuck in the open position in the
same calendar year. If the dump valve
is fixed following visual inspection, the
time period for which the dump valve
was stuck open will end upon being
repaired. If a stuck dump valve is
identified and not repaired, the time
period for which the dump valve was
stuck open must be counted as having
occurred through the rest of the
calendar year.
(ii) [Reserved]
(6) Mass emissions. Calculate both
CH4 and CO2 mass emissions from
natural gas volumetric emissions using
calculations in paragraph (v) of this
section.
(7) Thief hatches. If a thief hatch
sensor is operating on a controlled
atmospheric pressure storage tank, you
must use data obtained from the thief
hatch sensor to determine periods when
the thief hatch is open or not properly
seated. An applicable operating thief
hatch sensor must be capable of
transmitting and logging data whenever
a thief hatch is open or not properly
seated, as well as when the thief hatch
is subsequently closed. If a thief hatch
sensor is not operating, you must
perform a visual inspection of each thief
hatch on a controlled atmospheric
pressure storage tank in accordance
with paragraph (j)(7)(i) through (iii) of
this section.
(i) For thief hatches on atmospheric
pressure storage tanks subject to the
fugitive emissions standards for well
sites, centralized production facilities,
and compressor stations in § 60.5397b of
this chapter, or an applicable approved
state plan or applicable Federal plan in
part 62 of this chapter, visual
inspections must be conducted at least
as frequent as the required visual,
audible, or olfactory fugitive emissions
components surveys described in
§ 60.5397b or the applicable approved
state plan or applicable Federal plan in
(i) You must perform a visual
inspection of each gas-liquid separator
liquid dump valve to determine if the
valve is stuck in an open or partially
open position, in accordance with
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00116
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
EP01AU23.021
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50396
inspections are conducted in the
calendar year, assume a thief hatch
found open in the first visual inspection
was open since the beginning of the year
until the date of the visual inspection;
assume a thief hatch found open in the
last visual inspection of the year was
open from the preceding visual
inspection through the end of the year;
assume a thief hatch found open in a
visual inspection between the first and
last visual inspections of the year was
open since the preceding visual
inspection until the date of the visual
inspection.
(k) Condensate storage tanks. For vent
stacks connected to one or more
condensate storage tanks, either water or
hydrocarbon, without vapor recovery,
flares, or other controls, in onshore
natural gas transmission compression or
underground natural gas storage,
calculate CH4 and CO2 annual emissions
from compressor scrubber dump valve
leakage as specified in paragraphs (k)(1)
through (4) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(l) Well testing venting and flaring.
Calculate CH4 and CO2 annual
emissions from well testing venting as
specified in paragraphs (l)(1) through (5)
of this section. If emissions from well
testing venting are routed to a flare, you
must calculate CH4, CO2, and N2O
annual emissions as specified in
paragraph (n) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(3) Estimate venting emissions using
Equation W–17A (for oil wells) or
Equation W–17B (for gas wells) of this
section for each well tested during the
reporting year.
Where:
Ea,n = Annual volumetric natural gas
emissions from well testing for each well
being tested in cubic feet under actual
conditions.
GOR = Gas to oil ratio in cubic feet of gas
per barrel of oil for each well being
tested; oil here refers to hydrocarbon
liquids produced of all API gravities.
FR = Average annual flow rate in barrels of
oil per day for the oil well being tested.
PR = Average annual production rate in
actual cubic feet per day for the gas well
being tested.
D = Number of days during the calendar year
that the well is tested.
associated gas venting are routed to a
flare, you must calculate CH4, CO2, and
N2O annual emissions as specified in
paragraph (n) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(3) Estimate venting emissions using
Equation W–18 of this section.
Alternatively, if you measure the flow to
a vent using a continuous flow
measurement device, you must use the
measured flow volumes to calculate
vented associated gas emissions.
Where:
Es,n,p = Annual volumetric natural gas
emissions at each well from associated
gas venting at standard conditions, in
cubic feet.
GORp = Gas to oil ratio, for well p, in
standard cubic feet of gas per barrel of
oil; oil here refers to hydrocarbon liquids
produced of all API gravities.
Vp = Volume of oil produced, for well p, in
barrels in the calendar year only during
time periods in which associated gas was
vented or flared.
SGp = Volume of associated gas sent to sales
or volume of associated gas used for
other purposes at the facility site,
including powering engines, separators,
safety systems and/or combustion
equipment and not flared or vented, for
well p, in standard cubic feet of gas in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
*
*
*
*
*
(m) Associated gas venting and
flaring. Calculate CH4 and CO2 annual
emissions from associated gas venting
not in conjunction with well testing
(refer to paragraph (l) of this section) as
specified in paragraphs (m)(1) through
(4) of this section. If emissions from
the calendar year only during time
periods in which associated gas was
vented or flared.
*
*
*
*
*
(n) Flare stack emissions. Except as
specified in paragraph (n)(9) of this
section, calculate CO2, CH4, and N2O
emissions from each flare stack as
specified in paragraphs (n)(1) through
(8) of this section. For each flare,
disaggregate the total flared emissions to
applicable source types as specified in
paragraph (n)(10) of this section.
(1) Flow measurement. Measure total
flow to the flare as specified in either
paragraph (n)(1)(i) or (ii) of this section.
(i) Use a continuous parameter
monitoring system for measuring the
PO 00000
Frm 00117
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
flow of gas to the flare downstream of
any sweep, purge, or auxiliary gas
addition. You may use direct flow
meters or other parameter monitoring
systems combined with engineering
calculations, such as line pressure and
burner nozzle dimensions, to satisfy this
requirement. The continuous parameter
monitoring system must measure data
values at least once every hour.
(ii) Use a continuous parameter
monitoring system for measuring the
flow of gas from each source that routes
gas to the flare, including purge gas,
sweep gas, and auxiliary fuel. You may
use direct flow meters or other
parameter monitoring systems
combined with engineering
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
EP01AU23.023
part 62. If the time between required
visual, audible, or olfactory fugitive
emissions components surveys
described in § 60.5397b or the
applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 is
greater than one year, visual inspections
must be conducted at least annually.
(ii) For thief hatches on atmospheric
pressure storage tanks not subject to the
fugitive emissions standards for well
sites, centralized production facilities,
and compressor stations in § 60.5397b of
this chapter, or an applicable approved
state plan or applicable Federal plan in
part 62 of this chapter, visual
inspections must be conducted at least
once in a calendar year.
(iii) If one visual inspection is
conducted in the calendar year, assume
the thief hatch was open for the entire
calendar year. If multiple visual
EP01AU23.024
50397
EP01AU23.022
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50398
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
calculations, such as line pressure and
burner nozzle dimensions, to satisfy this
requirement. If the emission streams for
multiple sources are routed to a
manifold before being combined with
other emission streams, you may
conduct the measurement in the
manifold instead of from each source
that is routed to the manifold.
(2) Pilot. Continuously monitor for the
presence of a pilot flame or combustion
flame as specified in paragraph (n)(2)(i)
of this section or visually inspect for the
presence of a pilot flame or combustion
flame as specified in paragraph (n)(2)(ii)
of this section. If you continuously
monitor, then periods when the flare are
unlit must be determined based on
those data.
(i) At least once every five minutes
monitor for the presence of a pilot flame
or combustion flame using a device
(including, but not limited to, a
thermocouple, ultraviolet beam sensor,
or infrared sensor) capable of detecting
that the pilot or combustion flame is
present at all times. Continuous
monitoring systems used for the
presence of a pilot flame or combustion
flame are not subject to a minimum
accuracy requirement beyond being able
to detect the presence or absence of a
flame and are exempt from the
calibration requirements of this part 98.
Track the length of time over all periods
when the flare is unlit. Use the
measured flow during these time
periods, as determined from
measurements obtained under
paragraph (n)(1) of this section, to
calculate the fraction of the total annual
volume that is routed to the flare when
it is unlit. If the monitoring device is out
of service for more than one week, then
visually inspect for the presence of a
pilot flame or combustion flame at least
once per week for the first 4 weeks that
a monitoring device is out of service or
until a repaired or new device is
operational, whichever period is
shorter. If the continuous monitoring
device is out of service for less than one
week, then at least one visual inspection
must be conducted during the outage. If
a flame is not detected during a weekly
visual inspection, assume the pilot has
been unlit since the previous inspection
or the last time the continuous
monitoring device detected a flame, and
assume that the pilot remains unlit until
a subsequent inspection or continuous
monitoring device detects a flame. If the
monitoring device outage lasts more
than 4 weeks, then you may switch to
conducting inspections at least once per
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
month in accordance with paragraph
(n)(2)(ii) of this section.
(ii) At least once per month visually
inspect for the presence of a pilot flame
or combustion flame. If a flame is not
detected, assume the pilot has been
unlit since the previous inspection and
that it remains unlit until a subsequent
inspection detects a flame. Use the sum
of the measured flows, as determined
from measurements obtained under
paragraph (n)(1) of this section, during
all time periods when the pilot was
determined to be unlit, to calculate the
fraction of the total annual volume that
is routed to the flare when it is unlit.
(3) Gas composition. Determine the
composition of the inlet gas to the flare
as specified in either paragraph (n)(3)(i),
(ii), (iii), or (iv) of this section.
(i) Use a continuous gas composition
analyzer on the inlet gas to the flare
burner downstream of any purge,
sweep, or auxiliary fuel addition to
determine the annual average mole
fractions of methane, ethane, propane,
butane, pentanes plus, and CO2.
(ii) Take samples of the inlet gas to
the flare burner downstream of any
purge, sweep, or auxiliary fuel addition
at least once every quarter in which gas
is routed to the flare and analyze for
methane, ethane, propane, butane,
pentanes plus, and CO2 constituents,
Determine the annual average
concentration of each constituent as the
flow-weighted annual average of all
measurements for that constituent
during the year.
(iii) Use a continuous gas composition
analyzer on the emissions streams from
each emission source that routes gas to
the flare. Also take samples of purge gas,
sweep gas, and auxiliary fuel at least
annually, and analyze for methane
ethane, propane, butane, pentanes plus,
and CO2. If the emission streams for
multiple sources are routed to a
manifold before being combined with
other emission streams, you may
measure gas composition in the
manifold instead of from each source
that is routed to the manifold.
Determine the flow-weighted annual
average concentration of each
constituent.
(iv) Take samples of the emission
streams from each source that routes gas
to the flare at least once every quarter
in which gas is routed to the flare and
analyze for methane, ethane, propane,
butane, pentanes plus, and CO2. Also
take samples of purge gas, sweep gas,
and auxiliary fuel at least annually, and
analyze for methane, ethane, propane,
butane, pentanes plus, and CO2. If the
emission streams for multiple sources
PO 00000
Frm 00118
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
are routed to a manifold before being
combined with other emission streams,
you may measure gas composition in
the manifold instead of from each
source that is routed to the manifold.
Determine the annual average
concentration of each constituent in
each stream as the flow-weighted
average of all measurements for that
constituent during the year.
(4) Combustion efficiency. Use the
applicable default combustion
efficiency specified in paragraphs
(n)(4)(i) through (iii) of this section. If
you change the Tier with which you
comply during a year, then use the
applicable default combustion
efficiencies in paragraphs (n)(4)(i)
through (iii) of this section for portions
of the year during which the different
monitoring methodologies were used,
and calculate a time-weighted average
combustion efficiency to report for the
flare.
(i) Tier 1. If you monitor the flare as
specified in § 63.670 and § 63.671 of this
chapter, then use a default combustion
efficiency of 98 percent. The alternative
means of emissions limitation specified
in § 63.670(r) of this chapter do not
apply for the purposes of this paragraph
(n). References to deviations in
§ 63.670(b) of this chapter do not apply
for the purposes of this paragraph (n).
References to refineries or refinery
process units in § 63.670 of this chapter
mean facilities in any of the industry
segments specified in § 98.230 for the
purposes of this paragraph (n).
Reporting requirements in § 63.670(q) of
this chapter mean recordkeeping
requirements for the purposes of this
paragraph (n).
(ii) Tier 2. If you are required to
monitor the flare as specified in
§ 60.5417b(d)(1)(viii) of this chapter, or
you elect to implement the flare
monitoring requirements in
§ 60.5417b(d)(1)(viii) of this chapter,
then use a default combustion efficiency
of 95 percent. The exemptions from
monitoring gas flow in
§ 60.5417b(d)(1)(viii)(D)(1) through (4)
of this chapter do not apply for the
purposes of this paragraph (n).
(iii) Tier 3. If you do not monitor the
flare as specified in either paragraph
(n)(4)(i) or (ii) of this section, then use
a default combustion efficiency of 92
percent.
(5) Calculate CH4 and CO2 emissions.
Calculate GHG volumetric emissions
from flaring at standard conditions
using Equations W–19 and W–20 of this
section and as specified in paragraphs
(n)(5)(i) through (iv) of this section.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
(i) If you measure the gas flow at the
flare inlet as specified in paragraph
(n)(1)(i) of this section and you measure
gas composition for the inlet gas to the
flare as specified in paragraph (n)(3)(i)
or (ii) of this section, then use those data
in Equations W–19 and W–20 to
calculate total emissions from the flare.
(ii) If you measure the flow from each
source as specified in paragraph
(n)(1)(ii) of this section and you measure
gas composition for the inlet gas to the
flare as specified in paragraph (n)(3)(i)
or (ii) of this section, then sum the flows
for each stream to calculate the total
annual gas flow to the flare. Use that
total annual flow with the annual
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
average concentration of each
constituent as calculated in paragraph
(n)(3)(i) or (ii) of this section in
Equations W–19 and W–20 to calculate
total emissions from the flare.
(iii) If you measure the flow from each
source as specified in paragraph
(n)(1)(ii) of this section and you measure
gas composition for the emission stream
from each source as specified in
paragraph (n)(3)(iii) or (iv) of this
section, then calculate total emissions
from the flare as specified in either
paragraph (n)(5)(iii)(A) or (B) of this
section.
(A) Use each set of stream-specific
flow and annual average concentration
data in Equations W–19 and W–20 to
calculate stream-specific flared
emissions for each stream, and then sum
the results from each stream-specific
calculation to calculate the total
emissions from the flare.
(B) Sum the flows from each source to
calculate the total gas flow into the flare
and use the source-specific flows and
source-specific annual average
concentrations to determine flowweighted annual average concentrations
of CO2 and hydrocarbon constituents in
the combined gas stream into the flare.
Use the calculated total gas flow and the
calculated flow-weighted annual
average concentrations for the inlet gas
stream to the flare in Equations W–19
and W–20 to calculate the total
emissions from the flare.
(iv) You may not combine
measurement of the inlet gas flow to the
flare as specified in paragraph (n)(1)(i)
of this section with measurement of the
gas composition of the streams from
each source as specified in paragraph
(n)(3)(iii) or (iv) of this section.
(6) Convert volume at actual
conditions to volume at standard
conditions. Convert GHG volumetric
emissions to standard conditions using
calculations in paragraph (t) of this
section.
(7) Convert volumetric emissions to
mass emissions. Calculate both CH4 and
CO2 mass emissions from volumetric
emissions using calculation in
paragraph (v) of this section.
(8) Calculate N2O emissions.
Calculate N2O emissions from flare
stacks using Equation W–40 in
paragraph (z) of this section. Determine
higher heating values to use in Equation
PO 00000
Frm 00119
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
W–40 calculations as specified in
paragraphs (n)(8)(i) through (iii) of this
section, as applicable.
(i) If you measure composition of the
inlet gas to the flare as specified in
either paragraph (n)(3)(i) or (ii) of this
section, then calculate a flare-specific
higher heating value to use in Equation
W–40 to calculate total N2O emissions
from the flare.
(ii) If you measure composition of the
individual streams routed to the flare as
specified in paragraph (n)(3)(iii) or (iv)
of this section, and you calculate CH4
and CO2 emissions per stream as
specified in paragraph (n)(5)(iii)(A) of
this section, then calculate streamspecific higher heating values. Use the
stream-specific higher heating values in
separate stream-specific calculations of
N2O emissions and sum the resulting
values to calculate the total N2O
emissions from the flare.
(iii) If you measure composition of the
individual streams routed to the flare as
specified in paragraph (n)(3)(iii) or (iv)
of this section, and you calculate CH4
and CO2 emissions using flow-weighted
annual average concentrations for the
inlet gas to the flare as calculated
according to paragraph (n)(5)(iii)(B) of
this section, then either calculate higher
heating values and N2O emissions as
specified in paragraph (n)(8)(ii) of this
section, or calculate a flare-specific
higher heating value using the
calculated flow-weighted composition
of the inlet gas to the flare, and use this
flare-specific higher heating value to
calculate the total N2O emissions from
the flare.
(9) CEMS. If you operate and maintain
a CEMS that has both a CO2
concentration monitor and volumetric
flow rate monitor for the combustion
gases from the flare, you must calculate
CO2 emissions for the flare using the
CEMS. You must follow the Tier 4
Calculation Method and all associated
calculation, quality assurance,
reporting, and recordkeeping
requirements for Tier 4 in subpart C of
this part (General Stationary Fuel
Combustion Sources). If a CEMS is used
to calculate flare stack CO2 emissions,
you must also comply with all other
requirements specified in paragraphs
(n)(1) through (8) of this section, except
that calculation of CO2 emissions using
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
EP01AU23.026
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Where:
Es,CH4 = Annual CH4 emissions from flare
stack in cubic feet, at standard
conditions.
Es,CO2 = Annual CO2 emissions from flare
stack in cubic feet, at standard
conditions.
Vs = Volume of gas sent to flare in standard
cubic feet, during the year as determined
in paragraph (n)(1) of this section.
h = Flare combustion efficiency, expressed as
fraction of gas combusted by a burning
flare.
XCH4 = Annual average mole fraction of CH4
in the feed gas to the flare or in each of
the streams routed to the flare as
determined in paragraph (n)(3) of this
section.
XCO2 = Annual average mole fraction of CO2
in the feed gas to the flare or in each of
the streams routed to the flare as
determined in paragraph (n)(3) of this
section.
ZU = Fraction of the feed gas sent to an unlit flare determined from both the total
time the flare was unlit as determined by
monitoring the pilot flame or combustion
flame as specified in paragraph (n)(2) of
this section and the volume of gas routed
to the flare during periods when the flare
was unlit as determined by the flow
measurement required by paragraph
(n)(1) of this section.
ZL = Fraction of the feed gas sent to a burning
flare (equal to 1¥ZU).
Yj = Annual average mole fraction of
hydrocarbon constituents j (such as
methane, ethane, propane, butane, and
pentanes-plus) in the feed gas to the flare
or in each of the streams routed to the
flare as determined in paragraph (n)(3) of
this section.
Rj = Number of carbon atoms in the
hydrocarbon constituent j in the feed gas
to the flare: 1 for methane, 2 for ethane,
3 for propane, 4 for butane, and 5 for
pentanes-plus).
50399
EP01AU23.025
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50400
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
Equation W–20 in paragraph (n)(5) of
this section is not required.
(10) Disaggregation. Using
engineering calculations and best
available data, disaggregate the total
emissions from the flare as calculated in
paragraphs (n)(7) and (8) of this section
or paragraph (n)(9) of this section, as
applicable, to each source type listed in
paragraphs (n)(10)(i) through (viii) of
this section, as applicable to the
industry segment, that routed emissions
to the flare.
(i) Acid gas removal units.
(ii) Dehydrators.
(iii) Completions and workovers with
hydraulic fracturing.
(iv) Completions and workovers
without hydraulic fracturing.
(v) Hydrocarbon liquids and produced
water storage tanks.
(vi) Well testing.
(vii) Associated gas.
(viii) Other (collectively).
(o) Centrifugal compressor venting. If
you are required to report emissions
from centrifugal compressor venting as
specified in § 98.232(d)(2), (e)(2), (f)(2),
(g)(2), and (h)(2), you must conduct
volumetric emission measurements
specified in paragraph (o)(1) of this
section using methods specified in
paragraphs (o)(2) through (5) of this
section; perform calculations specified
in paragraphs (o)(6) through (9) of this
section; and calculate CH4 and CO2
mass emissions as specified in
paragraph (o)(11) of this section. If you
are required to report emissions from
centrifugal compressor venting at an
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facility as specified in
§ 98.232(c)(19) or an onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting
facility as specified in § 98.232(j)(8), you
must calculate volumetric emissions as
specified in paragraph (o)(10) of this
section and calculate CH4 and CO2 mass
emissions as specified in paragraph
(o)(11) of this section. If emissions from
a compressor source are routed to a
flare, paragraphs (o)(1) through (11) of
this section do not apply and instead
you must calculate CH4, CO2, and N2O
emissions as specified in paragraph (n)
of this section. If emissions from a
compressor source are routed to
combustion, paragraphs (o)(1) through
(11) of this section do not apply and
instead you must calculate and report
emissions as specified in subpart C of
this part or paragraph (z) of this section,
as applicable. If emissions from a
compressor source are routed to a vapor
recovery system, paragraphs (o)(1)
through (11) of this section do not
apply.
(1) * * *
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
(i) Centrifugal compressor source as
found measurements. Measure venting
from each compressor according to
either paragraph (o)(1)(i)(A), (B), or (C)
of this section at least once annually,
based on the compressor mode (as
defined in § 98.238) in which the
compressor was found at the time of
measurement, except as specified in
paragraph (o)(1)(i)(D) of this section. If
additional measurements beyond the
required annual testing are performed
(including duplicate measurements or
measurement of additional operating
modes), then all measurements
satisfying the applicable monitoring and
QA/QC that is required by this
paragraph (o) must be used in the
calculations specified in this section.
(A) For a compressor measured in
operating-mode, you must measure
volumetric emissions from blowdown
valve leakage through the blowdown
vent as specified in paragraph (o)(2)(i) of
this section, measure volumetric
emissions from wet seal oil degassing
vents as specified in paragraph (o)(2)(ii)
of this section if the compressor has wet
seal oil degassing vents, and measure
volumetric emissions from dry seal
vents as specified in paragraph (o)(2)(iii)
of this section if the compressor has dry
seals.
(B) For a compressor measured in notoperating-depressurized-mode, you
must measure volumetric emissions
from isolation valve leakage as specified
in paragraph (o)(2)(i) of this section. If
a compressor is not operated and has
blind flanges in place throughout the
reporting period, measurement is not
required in this compressor mode.
(C) For a compressor measured in
standby-pressurized-mode, you must
measure volumetric emissions from
blowdown valve leakage through the
blowdown vent as specified in
paragraph (o)(2)(i) of this section,
measure volumetric emissions from wet
seal oil degassing vents as specified in
paragraph (o)(2)(ii) of this section if the
compressor has wet seal oil degassing
vents, and measure volumetric
emissions from dry seal vents as
specified in paragraph (o)(2)(iii) of this
section if the compressor has dry seals.
*
*
*
*
*
(2) Methods for performing as found
measurements from individual
centrifugal compressor sources. If
conducting measurements for each
compressor source, you must determine
the volumetric emissions from
blowdown valves and isolation valves
as specified in paragraph (o)(2)(i) of this
section, the volumetric emissions from
wet seal oil degassing vents as specified
in paragraph (o)(2)(ii) of this section,
PO 00000
Frm 00120
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
and the volumetric emissions from dry
seal vents as specified in paragraph
(o)(2)(iii) of this section.
(i) For blowdown valves on
compressors in operating-mode or in
standby-pressurized-mode and for
isolation valves on compressors in notoperating-depressurized-mode,
determine the volumetric emissions
using one of the methods specified in
paragraphs (o)(2)(i)(A) through (D) of
this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(ii) For wet seal oil degassing vents in
operating-mode or in standbypressurized-mode, determine
volumetric flow at standard conditions,
using one of the methods specified in
paragraphs (o)(2)(ii)(A) through (C) of
this section. You must quantitatively
measure the volumetric flow for wet
seal oil degassing vent; you may not use
screening methods set forth in
§ 98.234(a) to screen for emissions for
the wet seal oil degassing vent.
(A) Use a temporary meter such as a
vane anemometer or permanent flow
meter according to methods set forth in
§ 98.234(b).
(B) Use calibrated bags according to
methods set forth in § 98.234(c).
(C) Use a high volume sampler
according to methods set forth in
§ 98.234(d).
(iii) For dry seal vents in operatingmode or in standby-pressurized-mode,
determine volumetric flow at standard
conditions from each dry seal vent using
one of the methods specified in
paragraphs (o)(2)(iii)(A) through (D) of
this section. If a compressor has more
than one dry seal vent, determine the
aggregate dry seal vent volumetric flow
for the compressor as the sum of the
volumetric flows determined for each
dry seal vent on the compressor.
(A) Use a temporary meter such as a
vane anemometer or permanent flow
meter according to methods set forth in
§ 98.234(b).
(B) Use calibrated bags according to
methods set forth in § 98.234(c).
(C) Use a high volume sampler
according to methods set forth in
§ 98.234(d).
(D) You may choose to use any of the
methods set forth in § 98.234(a)(1)
through (3) to screen for emissions. If
emissions are detected using one of
these specified methods, then you must
use one of the methods specified in
paragraph (o)(2)(iii)(A) through (C) of
this section. If emissions are not
detected using the methods in
§ 98.234(a)(1) through (3), then you may
assume that the volumetric emissions
are zero. For the purposes of this
paragraph, when using any of the
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
methods in § 98.234(a), emissions are
detected whenever a leak is detected
according to the methods. Acoustic leak
detection is only applicable for throughvalve leakage and is not applicable for
screening dry seal vents.
(4) * * *
(ii) * * *
(E) You may choose to use any of the
methods set forth in § 98.234(a)(1)
through (3) to screen for emissions. If
emissions are detected using one of
these methods, then you must use one
of the methods specified in paragraph
(o)(4)(ii)(A) through (D) of this section.
If emissions are not detected using the
methods in § 98.234(a)(1) through (3),
then you may assume that the
volumetric emissions are zero. For the
purposes of this paragraph, when using
any of the methods in § 98.234(a),
emissions are detected whenever a leak
is detected according to the method.
Acoustic leak detection is only
applicable for through-valve leakage and
is not applicable for screening a
manifolded group of compressor
sources.
*
*
*
*
*
(6) * * *
(i) Using Equation W–21 of this
section, calculate the annual volumetric
GHG emissions for each centrifugal
compressor mode-source combination
specified in paragraphs (o)(1)(i)(A)
through (C) of this section that was
measured during the reporting year.
*
*
*
*
*
m = Compressor mode-source
combination specified in paragraph
(o)(1)(i)(A), (B), or (C) of this section
that was measured for the reporting
year.
(ii) Using Equation W–22 of this
section, calculate the annual volumetric
GHG emissions from each centrifugal
compressor mode-source combination
specified in paragraphs (o)(1)(i)(A)
through (C) of this section that was not
measured during the reporting year.
*
*
*
*
*
m = Compressor mode-source
combination specified in paragraph
(o)(1)(i)(A), (B), or (C) of this section
that was not measured in the
reporting year.
(iii) Using Equation W–23 of this
section, develop an emission factor for
each compressor mode-source
combination specified in paragraphs
(o)(1)(i)(A) through (C) of this section.
These emission factors must be
calculated annually and used in
Equation W–22 of this section to
determine volumetric emissions from a
centrifugal compressor in the mode-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
source combinations that were not
measured in the reporting year.
*
*
*
*
*
m = Compressor mode-source
combination specified in paragraph
(o)(1)(i)(A), (B), or (C) of this
section.
*
*
*
*
*
(8) * * *
Tg = Total time the manifolded group of
compressor sources g had potential
for emissions in the reporting year,
in hours. Include all time during
which at least one compressor
source in the manifolded group of
compressor sources g was in a
mode-source combination specified
in either paragraph (o)(1)(i)(A),
(o)(1)(i)(B), (o)(1)(i)(C), (p)(1)(i)(A),
(p)(1)(i)(B), or (p)(1)(i)(C) of this
section. Default of 8760 hours may
be used.
*
*
*
*
*
(10) Method for calculating
volumetric GHG emissions from wet seal
oil degassing vents at an onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
facility or an onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting
facility. You must calculate volumetric
emissions from centrifugal compressors
at an onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facility or an onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facility as specified in
paragraphs (o)(10)(i) through (iii), as
applicable.
(i) For centrifugal compressors at an
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facility or an onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facility that are subject to the
centrifugal compressor standards in
§ 60.5380b of this chapter or an
applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of
this chapter for dry seals and selfcontained wet seals, you must conduct
measurements according to paragraphs
(o)(10)(i)(A) and (B) of this section.
(A) You must conduct the volumetric
emission measurements as required by
§ 60.5380b(a)(5) of this chapter or an
applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of
this chapter, conduct any additional
volumetric emission measurements
specified in paragraph (o)(1) of this
section using methods specified in
paragraphs (o)(2) through (5) of this
section, and calculate emissions as
specified in paragraphs (o)(6) through
(9) of this section. Conduct all
measurements required by this
paragraph (o)(10)(i)(A) at the frequency
specified by § 60.5380b(a)(4) of this
chapter or an applicable approved state
plan or applicable Federal plan in part
PO 00000
Frm 00121
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50401
62 of this chapter. For any reporting
year in which measuring at the
frequency specified by § 60.5380b(a)(4)
of this chapter results in measurement
not being required for a subject
compressor, calculate emissions for all
mode-source combinations as specified
in paragraph (o)(6)(ii) of this section.
(B) You must conduct measurements
of compressors as specified in paragraph
(o)(1)(i)(B) of this section such that at
the end of each calendar year, you have
taken measurements in not-operatingdepressurized-mode over the last 3
consecutive calendar years for at least
one-third of the compressors at your
facility that are subject to the centrifugal
compressor standards in § 60.5380b of
this chapter or an applicable approved
state plan or applicable Federal plan in
part 62 of this chapter for dry seals and
self-contained wet seals.
(ii) For centrifugal compressors at an
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facility or an onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facility that are not subject to
the centrifugal compressor standards in
§ 60.5380b of this chapter or an
applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of
this chapter for dry seals and selfcontained wet seals, you may elect to
conduct the volumetric emission
measurements specified in paragraph
(o)(1) of this section using methods
specified in paragraphs (o)(2) through
(5) of this section and perform
calculations specified in paragraphs
(o)(6) through (9) of this section.
(iii) For any centrifugal compressors
at an onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facility or an onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facility for which paragraphs
(o)(10)(i) and (ii) of this section do not
apply, you must calculate atmospheric
centrifugal compressor wet seal oil
degassing vents at an onshore petroleum
and natural gas production facility or an
onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facility using
Equation W–25 of this section.
Emissions from centrifugal compressor
wet seal oil degassing vents that are
routed to a flare, combustion, or vapor
recovery system are not required to be
determined under this paragraph (o).
Where:
Es,i = Annual volumetric GHGi (either CH4 or
CO2) emissions from centrifugal
compressor wet seals, at standard
conditions, in cubic feet.
Count = Total number of centrifugal
compressors that have wet seal oil
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
EP01AU23.027
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
50402
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
degassing vents that are vented directly
to the atmosphere.
EFi,s = Emission factor for GHGi. Use 1.2 × 107
standard cubic feet per year per
compressor for CH4 and 5.30 × 105
standard cubic feet per year per
compressor for CO2 at 60 °F and 14.7
psia.
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
*
*
*
*
*
(p) Reciprocating compressor venting.
If you are required to report emissions
from reciprocating compressor venting
as specified in § 98.232(d)(1), (e)(1),
(f)(1), (g)(1), and (h)(1), you must
conduct volumetric emission
measurements specified in paragraph
(p)(1) of this section using methods
specified in paragraphs (p)(2) through
(5) of this section; perform calculations
specified in paragraphs (p)(6) through
(9) of this section; and calculate CH4
and CO2 mass emissions as specified in
paragraph (p)(11) of this section. If you
are required to report emissions from
reciprocating compressor venting at an
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facility as specified in
§ 98.232(c)(11) or an onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting
facility as specified in § 98.232(j)(9), you
must calculate volumetric emissions as
specified in paragraph (p)(10) of this
section and calculate CH4 and CO2 mass
emissions as specified in paragraph
(p)(11) of this section. If emissions from
a compressor source are routed to a
flare, paragraphs (p)(1) through (11) of
this section do not apply and instead
you must calculate CH4, CO2, and N2O
emissions as specified in paragraph (n)
of this section. If emissions from a
compressor source are routed to
combustion, paragraphs (p)(1) through
(11) of this section do not apply and
instead you must calculate and report
emissions as specified in subpart C of
this part or paragraph (z) of this section,
as applicable. If emissions from a
compressor source are routed to a vapor
recovery system, paragraphs (p)(1)
through (11) of this section do not
apply.
(1) * * *
(i) Reciprocating compressor source as
found measurements. Measure venting
from each compressor according to
either paragraph (p)(1)(i)(A), (B), or (C)
of this section at least once annually,
based on the compressor mode (as
defined in § 98.238) in which the
compressor was found at the time of
measurement, except as specified in
paragraph (p)(1)(i)(D) of this section. If
additional measurements beyond the
required annual testing are performed
(including duplicate measurements or
measurement of additional operating
modes), then all measurements
satisfying the applicable monitoring and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
QA/QC that is required by this
paragraph (p) must be used in the
calculations specified in this section.
(A) For a compressor measured in
operating-mode, you must measure
volumetric emissions from blowdown
valve leakage through the blowdown
vent as specified in paragraph (p)(2)(i)
of this section, and measure volumetric
emissions from reciprocating rod
packing as specified in paragraph
(p)(2)(ii) or (iii) of this section, as
applicable.
(B) For a compressor measured in notoperating-depressurized-mode, you
must measure volumetric emissions
from isolation valve leakage as specified
in paragraph (p)(2)(i) of this section. If
a compressor is not operated and has
blind flanges in place throughout the
reporting period, measurement is not
required in this compressor mode.
(C) For a compressor measured in
standby-pressurized-mode, you must
measure volumetric emissions from
blowdown valve leakage through the
blowdown vent as specified in
paragraph (p)(2)(i) of this section and
measure volumetric emissions from
reciprocating rod packing as specified in
paragraph (p)(2)(ii) or (iii) of this
section, as applicable.
(D) An annual as found measurement
is not required in the first year of
operation for any new compressor that
begins operation after as found
measurements have been conducted for
all existing compressors. For only the
first year of operation of new
compressors, calculate emissions
according to paragraph (p)(6)(ii) of this
section.
*
*
*
*
*
(2) Methods for performing as found
measurements from individual
reciprocating compressor sources. If
conducting measurements for each
compressor source, you must determine
the volumetric emissions from
blowdown valves and isolation valves
as specified in paragraph (p)(2)(i) of this
section. You must determine the
volumetric emissions from reciprocating
rod packing as specified in paragraph
(p)(2)(ii) or (iii) of this section, as
applicable.
*
*
*
*
*
(ii) For reciprocating rod packing
equipped with an open-ended vent line
on compressors in operating-mode or
standby-pressurized-mode, determine
the volumetric emissions using one of
the methods specified in paragraphs
(p)(2)(ii)(A) through (C) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(C) You may choose to use any of the
methods set forth in § 98.234(a)(1)
through (3) to screen for emissions. If
PO 00000
Frm 00122
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
emissions are detected using one of
these specified methods, then you must
use one of the methods specified in
paragraphs (p)(2)(ii)(A) and (B) of this
section. If emissions are not detected
using the methods in § 98.234(a)(1)
through (3), then you may assume that
the volumetric emissions are zero. For
the purposes of this paragraph
(p)(2)(ii)(C), when using any of the
methods in § 98.234(a), emissions are
detected whenever a leak is detected
according to the method. Acoustic leak
detection is only applicable for throughvalve leakage and is not applicable for
screening or measuring rod packing
emissions.
(iii) * * *
(A) You must use the methods
described in § 98.234(a)(1) through (3) to
conduct annual leak detection of
equipment leaks from the packing case
into an open distance piece, or for
compressors with a closed distance
piece, conduct annual detection of gas
emissions from the rod packing vent,
distance piece vent, compressor crank
case breather cap, or other vent emitting
gas from the rod packing. Acoustic leak
detection is only applicable for throughvalve leakage and is not applicable for
screening rod packing emissions.
*
*
*
*
*
(4) * * *
(ii) * * *
(C) A high volume sampler according
to methods set forth in § 98.234(d).
*
*
*
*
*
(E) You may choose to use any of the
methods set forth in § 98.234(a)(1)
through (3) to screen for emissions. If
emissions are detected using one of
these specified methods, then you must
use one of the methods specified in
paragraphs (p)(4)(ii)(A) through (D) of
this section. If emissions are not
detected using the methods in
§ 98.234(a)(1) through (3), then you may
assume that the volumetric emissions
are zero. For the purposes of this
paragraph, when using any of the
methods in § 98.234(a), emissions are
detected whenever a leak is detected
according to the method. Acoustic leak
detection is only applicable for throughvalve leakage and is not applicable for
screening a manifolded group of
compressor sources.
*
*
*
*
*
(6) * * *
(ii) Using Equation W–27 of this
section, calculate the annual volumetric
GHG emissions from each reciprocating
compressor mode-source combination
specified in paragraphs (p)(1)(i)(A)
through (C) of this section that was not
measured during the reporting year.
*
*
*
*
*
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
(iii) Using Equation W–28 of this
section, develop an emission factor for
each compressor mode-source
combination specified in paragraphs
(p)(1)(i)(A) through (C) of this section.
These emission factors must be
calculated annually and used in
Equation W–27 of this section to
determine volumetric emissions from a
reciprocating compressor in the modesource combinations that were not
measured in the reporting year.
*
*
*
*
*
(8) * * *
Tg = Total time the manifolded group of
compressor sources g had potential
for emissions in the reporting year,
in hours. Include all time during
which at least one compressor
source in the manifolded group of
compressor sources g was in a
mode-source combination specified
in either paragraph (o)(1)(i)(A),
(o)(1)(i)(B), (o)(1)(i)(C), (p)(1)(i)(A),
(p)(1)(i)(B), or (p)(1)(i)(C) of this
section. Default of 8760 hours may
be used.
*
*
*
*
*
(10) Method for calculating
volumetric GHG emissions from
reciprocating compressor venting at an
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facility or an onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering
and boosting facility. You must
calculate volumetric emissions from
reciprocating compressors at an onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
facility or an onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting
facility as specified in paragraphs
(p)(10)(i) through (iii) of this section, as
applicable.
(i) For reciprocating compressors at an
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facility or an onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facility that are subject to the
reciprocating compressor standards in
§ 60.5385b of this chapter or an
applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of
this chapter, you must conduct
measurements according to paragraphs
(p)(10)(i)(A) and (B) of this section.
(A) You must conduct the volumetric
emission measurements as required by
§ 60.5385b(b) and (c) of this chapter or
an applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of
this chapter, conduct any additional
volumetric emission measurements
specified in paragraph (p)(1) of this
section using methods specified in
paragraphs (p)(2) through (5) of this
section, and calculate emissions as
specified in paragraphs (p)(6) through
(9) of this section. Conduct all
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
measurements required by this
paragraph (p)(10)(i)(A) at the frequency
specified by § 60.5385b(a) of this
chapter or an applicable approved state
plan or applicable Federal plan in part
62 of this chapter. For any reporting
year in which measuring at the
frequency specified by § 60.5385b(a) of
this chapter results in measurement not
being required for a subject compressor,
calculate emissions for all mode-source
combinations as specified in paragraph
(p)(6)(ii) of this section.
(B) You must conduct measurements
of compressors as specified in paragraph
(p)(1)(i)(B) of this section such that at
the end of each calendar year, you have
taken measurements in not-operatingdepressurized-mode over the last 3
consecutive calendar years for at least
one-third of the compressors at your
facility that are subject to the
reciprocating compressor standards in
§ 60.5385b of this chapter or an
applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of
this chapter.
(ii) For reciprocating compressors at
an onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facility or an onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facility that are not subject to
the reciprocating compressor standards
in § 60.5385b of this chapter or an
applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of
this chapter, you may elect to conduct
volumetric emission measurements
specified in paragraph (p)(1) of this
section using methods specified in
paragraphs (p)(2) through (5) of this
section and perform calculations
specified in paragraphs (p)(6) through
(9) of this section.
(iii) For any reciprocating
compressors at an onshore petroleum
and natural gas production facility or an
onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facility for which
paragraphs (p)(10)(i) and (ii) of this
section do not apply, you must calculate
reciprocating compressor atmospheric
venting of rod packing emissions using
Equation W–29D of this section.
Reciprocating compressor rod packing
emissions that are routed to a flare,
combustion, or vapor recovery system
are not required to be determined under
this paragraph (p).
Where:
Es,i = Annual volumetric GHGi (either CH4 or
CO2) emissions from reciprocating
compressors, at standard conditions, in
cubic feet.
PO 00000
Frm 00123
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50403
Count = Total number of reciprocating
compressors with rod packing emissions
vented directly to the atmosphere.
EFi,s = Emission factor for GHGi. Use 2.13 ×
105 standard cubic feet per year per
compressor for CH4 and 1.18 × 104
standard cubic feet per year per
compressor for CO2 at 60 °F and 14.7
psia.
*
*
*
*
*
(q) Equipment leak surveys. For the
components identified in paragraphs
(q)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section, you
must conduct equipment leak surveys
using the leak detection methods
specified in paragraphs (q)(1)(i) through
(iii) and (v) of this section. For the
components identified in paragraph
(q)(1)(iv) of this section, you may elect
to conduct equipment leak surveys, and
if you elect to conduct surveys, you
must use a leak detection method
specified in paragraph (q)(1)(iv) of this
section. This paragraph (q) applies to
components in streams with gas content
greater than 10 percent CH4 plus CO2 by
weight. Components in streams with gas
content less than or equal to 10 percent
CH4 plus CO2 by weight are exempt
from the requirements of this paragraph
(q) and do not need to be reported.
Tubing systems equal to or less than one
half inch diameter are exempt from the
requirements of this paragraph (q) and
do not need to be reported. Equipment
leak components in vacuum service are
exempt from the survey and emission
estimation requirements of this
paragraph (q) and only the count of
these equipment must be reported.
(1) Survey requirements—(i) For the
components listed in § 98.232(e)(7),
(f)(5), (g)(4), and (h)(5), that are not
subject to the well site or compressor
station fugitive emissions standards in
§ 60.5397a of this chapter, the fugitive
emissions standards for well sites,
centralized production facilities, and
compressor stations in § 60.5397b of this
chapter, or an applicable approved state
plan or applicable Federal plan in part
62 of this chapter, you must conduct
surveys using any of the leak detection
methods listed in § 98.234(a) and
calculate equipment leak emissions
using the procedures specified in either
paragraph (q)(2) or (3) of this section.
(ii) For the components listed in
§ 98.232(i)(1), you must conduct surveys
using any of the leak detection methods
listed in § 98.234(a) except
§ 98.234(a)(2)(ii) and calculate
equipment leak emissions using the
procedures specified in either paragraph
(q)(2) or (3) of this section.
(iii) For the components listed in
§ 98.232(c)(21)(i), (e)(7) and (8), (f)(5)
through (8), (g)(4), (g)(6) and (7), (h)(5),
(h)(7) and (8), and (j)(10)(i) that are
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
EP01AU23.028
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50404
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
subject to the well site or compressor
station fugitive emissions standards in
§ 60.5397a of this chapter, the fugitive
emissions standards for well sites,
centralized production facilities, and
compressor stations in § 60.5397b of this
chapter, or an applicable approved state
plan or applicable Federal plan in part
62 of this chapter, you must conduct
surveys using any of the leak detection
methods in § 98.234(a)(1)(ii) or (iii) or
(a)(2)(ii), as applicable, and calculate
equipment leak emissions using the
procedures specified in either paragraph
(q)(2) or (3) of this section.
(iv) For the components listed in
§ 98.232(c)(21)(i), (e)(8), (f)(6) through
(8), (g)(6) or (7), (h)(7) or (8), or (j)(10)(i),
that are not subject to fugitive emissions
standards in § 60.5397a of this chapter,
the fugitive emissions standards for well
sites, centralized production facilities,
and compressor stations in § 60.5397b of
this chapter, or an applicable approved
state plan or applicable Federal plan in
part 62 of this chapter, you may elect to
conduct surveys according to this
paragraph (q), and, if you elect to do so,
then you must use one of the leak
detection methods in § 98.234(a).
(A) If you elect to use a leak detection
method in § 98.234(a) for the surveyed
component types in § 98.232(c)(21)(i),
(f)(7), (g)(6), (h)(7), or (j)(10)(i) in lieu of
the population count methodology
specified in paragraph (r) of this section,
then you must calculate emissions for
the surveyed component types in
§ 98.232(c)(21)(i), (f)(7), (g)(6), (h)(7), or
(j)(10)(i) using the procedures in either
paragraph (q)(2) or (3) of this section.
(B) If you elect to use a leak detection
method in § 98.234(a) for the surveyed
component types in § 98.232(e)(8), (f)(6)
and (8), (g)(7), and (h)(8), then you must
use the procedures in either paragraph
(q)(2) or (3) of this section to calculate
those emissions.
(C) If you elect to use a leak detection
method in § 98.234(a)(1)(ii) or (iii) or
(a)(2)(ii), as applicable, for any elective
survey under paragraph (q)(1)(iv) of this
section, then you must survey the
component types in § 98.232(c)(21)(i),
(e)(8), (f)(6) through (8), (g)(6) and (7),
(h)(7) and (8), and (j)(10)(i) that are not
subject to fugitive emissions standards
in § 60.5397a of this chapter, the
fugitive emissions standards for well
sites, centralized production facilities,
and compressor stations in § 60.5397b of
this chapter, or an applicable approved
state plan or applicable Federal plan in
part 62 of this chapter, and you must
calculate emissions from the surveyed
component types in § 98.232(c)(21)(i),
(e)(8), (f)(6) through (8), (g)(6) and (7),
(h)(7) and (8), and (j)(10)(i) using the
emission calculation requirements in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
either paragraph (q)(2) or (3) of this
section.
(v) For the components listed in
§ 98.232(d)(7), you must conduct
surveys as specified in paragraphs
(q)(1)(v)(A) and (B) of this section and
you must calculate equipment leak
emissions using the procedures
specified in either paragraph (q)(2) or (3)
of this section.
(A) For the components listed in
§ 98.232(d)(7) that are not subject to the
equipment leak standards for onshore
natural gas processing plants in
§ 60.5400b of this chapter, or an
applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of
this chapter, you may use any of the
leak detection methods listed in
§ 98.234(a).
(B) For the components listed in
§ 98.232(d)(7) that are subject to the
equipment leak standards for onshore
natural gas processing plants in
§ 60.5400b of this chapter, or an
applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of
this chapter, you must use either of the
leak detection methods in
§ 98.234(a)(1)(iii) or (a)(2)(ii).
(vi) Except as provided in paragraph
(q)(1)(vii) of this section, you must
conduct at least one complete leak
detection survey in a calendar year. If
you conduct multiple complete leak
detection surveys in a calendar year,
you must use the results from each
complete leak detection survey when
calculating emissions using the
procedures specified in either paragraph
(q)(2) or (3) of this section. Except as
provided in paragraphs (q)(1)(vi)(A)
through (G) of this section, a complete
leak detection survey is a survey in
which all equipment components
required to be surveyed as specified in
paragraphs (q)(1)(i) through (v) of this
section are surveyed.
(A) For components subject to the
well site and compressor station fugitive
emissions standards in § 60.5397a of
this chapter, each survey conducted in
accordance with § 60.5397a of this
chapter using one of the methods in
§ 98.234(a) will be considered a
complete leak detection survey for
purposes of this section.
(B) For components subject to the
well site, centralized production
facility, and compressor station fugitive
emissions standards in § 60.5397b of
this chapter, each survey conducted in
accordance with the fugitive emissions
standards for well sites, centralized
production facilities, and compressor
stations in § 60.5397b of this chapter
using one of the methods in § 98.234(a)
will be considered a complete leak
PO 00000
Frm 00124
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
detection survey for purposes of this
section.
(C) For components subject to the
well site, centralized production
facility, and compressor station fugitive
emissions standards in an applicable
approved state plan or applicable
Federal plan in part 62 of this chapter,
each survey conducted in accordance
with the applicable approved state plan
or applicable Federal plan in part 62 of
this chapter using one of the methods in
§ 98.234(a) will be considered a
complete leak detection survey for
purposes of this section.
(D) For an onshore petroleum and
natural gas production facility electing
to conduct leak detection surveys
according to paragraph (q)(1)(iv) of this
section, a survey of all required
components at a single well-pad will be
considered a complete leak detection
survey for purposes of this section.
(E) For an onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting
facility electing to conduct leak
detection surveys according to
paragraph (q)(1)(iv) of this section, a
survey of all required components at a
gathering and boosting site, as defined
in § 98.238, will be considered a
complete leak detection survey for
purposes of this section.
(F) For an onshore natural gas
processing facility subject to the
equipment leak standards for onshore
natural gas processing plants in
§ 60.5400b of this chapter or an
applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of
this chapter, each survey conducted in
accordance with the equipment leak
standards for onshore natural gas
processing plants in § 60.5400b of this
chapter or an applicable approved state
plan or applicable Federal plan in part
62 of this chapter will be considered a
complete leak detection survey for the
purposes of calculating emissions using
the procedures specified in either
paragraph (q)(2) or (3) of this section. At
least one complete leak detection survey
conducted during the reporting year
must include all components listed in
§ 98.232(d)(7) and subject to this
paragraph (q), including components
which are considered inaccessible
emission sources as defined in part 60
of this chapter.
(G) For natural gas distribution
facilities that choose to conduct
equipment leak surveys at all above
grade transmission-distribution transfer
stations over multiple years as provided
in paragraph (q)(1)(vii) of this section, a
survey of all required components at the
above grade transmission-distribution
transfer stations monitored during the
calendar year will be considered a
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50405
complete leak detection survey for
purposes of this section.
(vii) Natural gas distribution facilities
are required to perform equipment leak
surveys only at above grade stations that
qualify as transmission-distribution
transfer stations. Below grade
transmission-distribution transfer
stations and all metering-regulating
stations that do not meet the definition
of transmission-distribution transfer
stations are not required to perform
equipment leak surveys under this
section. Natural gas distribution
facilities may choose to conduct
equipment leak surveys at all above
grade transmission-distribution transfer
stations over multiple years ‘‘n,’’ not
exceeding a five-year period to cover all
above grade transmission-distribution
transfer stations. If the facility chooses
to use the multiple year option, then the
number of transmission-distribution
transfer stations that are monitored in
each year should be approximately
equal across all years in the cycle.
(2) Calculation Method 1: Leaker
emission factor calculation
methodology. If you elect not to measure
leaks according to Calculation Method 2
as specified in paragraph (q)(3) of this
section, you must use this Calculation
Method 1 for all components included
in a complete leak survey. For industry
segments listed in § 98.230(a)(2) through
(9), if equipment leaks are detected
during surveys required or elected for
components listed in paragraphs
(q)(1)(i) through (v) of this section, then
you must calculate equipment leak
emissions per component type per
reporting facility using Equation W–30
of this section and the requirements
specified in paragraphs (q)(2)(i) through
(ix) of this section. For the industry
segment listed in § 98.230(a)(8), the
results from Equation W–30 are used to
calculate population emission factors on
a meter/regulator run basis using
Equation W–31 of this section. If you
chose to conduct equipment leak
surveys at all above grade transmissiondistribution transfer stations over
multiple years, ‘‘n,’’ according to
paragraph (q)(1)(vii) of this section, then
you must calculate the emissions from
all above grade transmissiondistribution transfer stations as
specified in paragraph (q)(2)(xi) of this
section.
Where:
Es,p,i = Annual total volumetric emissions of
GHGi from specific component type ‘‘p’’
(in accordance with paragraphs (q)(1)(i)
through (v) of this section) in standard
(‘‘s’’) cubic feet, as specified in
paragraphs (q)(2)(ii) through (x) of this
section.
xp = Total number of specific component
type ‘‘p’’ detected as leaking in any leak
survey during the year. A component
found leaking in two or more surveys
during the year is counted as one leaking
component.
EFs,p = Leaker emission factor as specified in
paragraphs (q)(2)(iii) through (x) of this
section.
k = Factor to adjust for undetected leaks by
respective leak detection method, where
k equals 1.25 for the methods in
§ 98.234(q)(1), (3) and (5); k equals 1.55
for the method in § 98.234(q)(2)(i); and k
equals 1.27 for the method in
§ 98.234(q)(2)(ii).
GHGi = For onshore petroleum and natural
gas production facilities and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities, concentration of
GHGi, CH4, or CO2, in produced natural
gas as defined in paragraph (u)(2) of this
section; for onshore natural gas
processing facilities, concentration of
GHGi, CH4 or CO2, in the total
hydrocarbon of the feed natural gas; for
onshore natural gas transmission
compression and underground natural
gas storage, GHGi equals 0.975 for CH4
and 1.1 × 10¥2 for CO2; for LNG storage
and LNG import and export equipment,
GHGi equals 1 for CH4 and 0 for CO2; and
for natural gas distribution, GHGi equals
1 for CH4 and 1.1 × 10¥2 CO2.
Tp,z = The total time the surveyed component
‘‘z,’’ component type ‘‘p,’’ was assumed
to be leaking and operational, in hours.
If one leak detection survey is conducted
in the calendar year, assume the
component was leaking for the entire
calendar year. If multiple leak detection
surveys are conducted in the calendar
year, assume a component found leaking
in the first survey was leaking since the
beginning of the year until the date of the
survey; assume a component found
leaking in the last survey of the year was
leaking from the preceding survey
through the end of the year; assume a
component found leaking in a survey
between the first and last surveys of the
year was leaking since the preceding
survey until the date of the survey; and
sum times for all leaking periods. For
each leaking component, account for
time the component was not operational
(i.e., not operating under pressure) using
an engineering estimate based on best
available data.
must, if available, use the site-specific
leaker emission factor calculated in
accordance with paragraph (q)(4) of
section or use the appropriate default
whole gas leaker factors for components
in gas service listed in Table W–2 to this
subpart.
(v) Onshore natural gas processing
facilities must, if available, use the sitespecific leaker emission factor
calculated in accordance with paragraph
(q)(4) of section or use the appropriate
default total hydrocarbon leaker
emission factors for compressor
components in gas service and noncompressor components in gas service
listed in table W–4 to this subpart.
(vi) Onshore natural gas transmission
compression facilities must, if available,
use the site-specific leaker emission
factor calculated in accordance with
paragraph (q)(4) of section or use the
appropriate default total hydrocarbon
leaker emission factors for compressor
components in gas service and noncompressor components in gas service
listed in table W–4 to this subpart.
(vii) Underground natural gas storage
facilities must, if available, use the sitespecific leaker emission factor
calculated in accordance with paragraph
(q)(4) of section or use the appropriate
default total hydrocarbon leaker
emission factors for storage stations or
storage wellheads in gas service listed in
table W–4 to this subpart.
(viii) LNG storage facilities must, if
available, use the site-specific leaker
emission factor calculated in accordance
with paragraph (q)(4) of section or use
the appropriate default methane leaker
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
(i) The leak detection surveys selected
for use in Equation W–30 must be
conducted during the calendar year as
indicated in paragraph (q)(1)(vi) and
(vii) of this section, as applicable.
*
*
*
*
*
(iii) Onshore petroleum and natural
gas production facilities must, if
available, use the site-specific leaker
emission factor calculated in accordance
with paragraph (q)(4) of section or use
the appropriate default whole gas leaker
emission factors consistent with the
well type, where components associated
with gas wells are considered to be in
gas service and components associated
with oil wells are considered to be in oil
service as listed in Table W–2 to this
subpart.
(iv) Onshore petroleum and natural
gas gathering and boosting facilities
PO 00000
Frm 00125
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
EP01AU23.029
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
emission factors for LNG storage
components in LNG service or gas
service listed in table W–6 to this
subpart.
(ix) LNG import and export facilities
must, if available, use the site-specific
leaker emission factor calculated in
accordance with paragraph (q)(4) of
section or use the appropriate default
methane leaker emission factors for LNG
terminals components in LNG service or
gas service listed in table W–6 to this
subpart.
(x) Natural gas distribution facilities
must use Equation W–30 of this section
and the default methane leaker emission
factors for transmission-distribution
transfer station components in gas
service listed in table W–6 to this
subpart to calculate component
emissions from annual equipment leak
surveys conducted at above grade
transmission-distribution transfer
stations.
(A) Use Equation W–31 of this section
to determine the meter/regulator run
population emission factors for each
GHGi. As additional survey data become
available, you must recalculate the
meter/regulator run population
emission factors for each GHGi annually
according to paragraph (q)(2)(x)(B) of
this section.
Where:
EFs,MR,i = Meter/regulator run population
emission factor for GHGi based on all
surveyed above grade transmissiondistribution transfer stations over ‘‘n’’
years, in standard cubic feet of GHGi per
operational hour of all meter/regulator
runs.
Es,p,i,y = Annual total volumetric emissions at
standard conditions of GHGi from
component type ‘‘p’’ during year ‘‘y’’ in
standard (‘‘s’’) cubic feet, as calculated
using Equation W–30 of this section.
p = Seven component types listed in Table
W–6 to this subpart for transmissiondistribution transfer stations.
Tw,y = The total time the surveyed meter/
regulator run ‘‘w’’ was operational, in
hours during survey year ‘‘y’’ using an
engineering estimate based on best
available data.
CountMR,y = Count of meter/regulator runs
surveyed at above grade transmissiondistribution transfer stations in year ‘‘y’’.
y = Year of data included in emission factor
‘‘EFs,MR,i’’ according to paragraph
(q)(2)(x)(B) of this section.
n = Number of years of data, according to
paragraph (q)(1)(vii) of this section,
whose results are used to calculate
emission factor ‘‘EFs,MR,i’’ according to
paragraph (q)(2)(x)(B) of this section.
W–31 of this section. After the first
survey cycle of ‘‘n’’ years is completed
and beginning in calendar year (n+1),
the survey will continue on a rolling
basis by including the survey results
from the current calendar year ‘‘y’’ and
survey results from all previous (n¥1)
calendar years, such that each annual
calculation of the emission factor
‘‘EFs,MR,i’’ from Equation W–31 is based
on survey results from ‘‘n’’ years. Upon
completion of a cycle, you may elect to
change the number of years in the next
cycle period (to be 5 years or less). If the
number of years in the new cycle is
greater than the number of years in the
previous cycle, calculate ‘‘EFs,MR,i’’ from
Equation W–31 in each year of the new
cycle using the survey results from the
current calendar year and the survey
results from the preceding number years
that is equal to the number of years in
the previous cycle period. If the number
of years, ‘‘nnew,’’ in the new cycle is
smaller than the number of years in the
previous cycle, ‘‘n,’’ calculate ‘‘EFs,MR,i’’
from Equation W–31 in each year of the
new cycle using the survey results from
the current calendar year and survey
results from all previous (nnew¥1)
calendar years.
(xi) If you chose to conduct
equipment leak surveys at all above
grade transmission-distribution transfer
stations over multiple years, ‘‘n,’’
according to paragraph (q)(1)(vii) of this
section, you must use the meter/
regulator run population emission
factors calculated using Equation W–31
of this section and the total count of all
meter/regulator runs at above grade
transmission-distribution transfer
stations to calculate emissions from all
above grade transmission-distribution
transfer stations using Equation W–32B
in paragraph (r) of this section.
(3) Calculation Method 2: Leaker
measurement methodology. For
industry segments listed in
§ 98.230(a)(2) through (9), if equipment
leaks are detected during surveys
required or elected for components
listed in paragraphs (q)(1)(i) through (v)
of this section, you may elect to measure
the volumetric flow rate of each natural
gas leak identified during a complete
leak survey. If you elect to use this
method, you must use this method for
all components included in a complete
leak survey and you must determine the
volumetric flow rate of each natural gas
leak identified during the leak survey
and aggregate the emissions by the
method of leak detection and
component type as specified in
paragraphs (q)(3)(i) through (vii) of this
section.
(i) Determine the volumetric flow rate
of each natural gas leak identified
during the leak survey following the
methods § 98.234(b) through (d), as
appropriate for each leak identified. You
do not need to use the same
measurement method for each leak
measured.
(ii) For each leak, calculate the
volume of natural gas emitted as the
product of the natural gas flow rate
measured in paragraph (q)(3)(i) of this
section and the duration of the leak. If
one leak detection survey is conducted
in the calendar year, assume the
component was leaking for the entire
calendar year. If multiple leak detection
surveys are conducted in the calendar
year, assume a component found
leaking in the first survey was leaking
since the beginning of the year until the
date of the survey; assume a component
found leaking in the last survey of the
year was leaking from the preceding
survey through the end of the year;
(B) The emission factor ‘‘eFs,MR,i,’’
based on annual equipment leak surveys
at above grade transmission-distribution
transfer stations, must be calculated
annually. If you chose to conduct
equipment leak surveys at all above
grade transmission-distribution transfer
stations over multiple years, ‘‘n,’’
according to paragraph (q)(1)(vii) of this
section and you have submitted a
smaller number of annual reports than
the duration of the selected cycle period
of 5 years or less, then all available data
from the current year and previous years
must be used in the calculation of the
emission factor ‘‘EFs,MR,i’’ from Equation
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00126
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
EP01AU23.030
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50406
assume a component found leaking in a
survey between the first and last surveys
of the year was leaking since the
preceding survey until the date of the
survey. For each leaking component,
account for time the component was not
operational (i.e., not operating under
pressure) using an engineering estimate
based on best available data.
(iii) For each leak, convert the
volumetric emissions of natural gas
determined in paragraph (q)(3)(ii) of this
section to standard conditions using the
method specified in paragraph (t)(1) of
this section.
(iv) For each leak, convert the
volumetric emissions of natural gas at
standard conditions determined in
paragraph (q)(3)(iii) of this section to
CO2 and CH4 volumetric emissions at
standard conditions using the methods
specified in paragraph (u) of this
section.
(v) For each leak, convert the GHG
volumetric emissions at standard
conditions determined in paragraph
(q)(3)(iv) of this section to GHG mass
emissions using the methods specified
in paragraph (v) of this section.
(vi) Sum the CO2 and CH4 mass
emissions determined in paragraph
(q)(3)(v) of this section separately for
each type of component required to be
surveyed by the method used for the
survey for which a leak was detected.
(vii) Multiply the total CO2 and CH4
mass emissions by survey method and
component type determined in
paragraph (q)(3)(vi) by the survey
specific value for ‘‘k’’, the factor
adjustment for undetected leaks, where
k equals 1.25 for the methods in
§ 98.234(q)(1), (3) and (5); k equals 1.55
for the method in § 98.234(q)(2)(i); and
k equals 1.27 for the method in
§ 98.234(q)(2)(ii).
(viii) For natural gas distribution
facilities:
(A) Use Equation W–31 of this section
to determine the meter/regulator run
population emission factors for each
GHGi using the methods as specified in
paragraphs (q)(2)(x)(A) and (B) of this
section, except use the GHG mass
emissions calculated in paragraph
(q)(3)(vi) of this section rather than the
emissions calculated using Equation W–
30.
(B) If you chose to conduct equipment
leak surveys at all above grade
transmission-distribution transfer
stations over multiple years, ‘‘n,’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
according to paragraph (q)(1)(vii) of this
section, you must use the meter/
regulator run population emission
factors calculated according to
paragraph (q)(3)(vii)(A) of this section
and the total count of all meter/regulator
runs at above grade transmissiondistribution transfer stations to calculate
emissions from all above grade
transmission-distribution transfer
stations using Equation W–32B in
paragraph (r) of this section.
(4) Development of site-specific
component-level leaker emission factors
by leak detection method. If you elect to
measure leaks according to Calculation
Method 2 as specified in paragraph
(q)(3) of this section, you must use the
measurement values determined in
accordance with paragraph (q)(3) of this
section to calculate a site-specific
component-level leaker emission factor
by leak detection method as provided in
paragraphs (q)(4)(i) through (iv) of this
section.
(i) You must track the leak
measurements made separately for each
of the applicable components listed in
paragraphs (q)(1)(i) through (v) of this
section and by the leak detection
method according to the following three
bins.
(A) Method 21 as specified in
§ 98.234(a)(2)(i).
(B) Method 21 as specified in
§ 98.234(a)(2)(ii).
(C) Optical gas imaging (OGI) and
other leak detection methods as
specified in § 98.234(a)(1), (3), or (5).
(ii) You must accumulate a minimum
of 50 leak measurements total for a
given component type and leak
detection method combination before
you can develop and use a site-specific
component-level leaker emission factor
for use in calculating emissions
according to paragraph (q)(2) of this
section (Calculation Method 1: Leaker
emission factor calculation
methodology).
(iii) Sum the volumetric flow rate of
natural gas determined in accordance
with paragraph (q)(3)(i) of this section
for each leak by component type and
leak detection method as specified in
paragraph (q)(4)(i) of this section
meeting the minimum number of
measurement requirement in paragraph
(q)(4)(ii) of this section.
(iv) Convert the volumetric flow rate
of natural gas determined in paragraph
(q)(4)(iii) of this section to standard
PO 00000
Frm 00127
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
50407
conditions using the method specified
in paragraph (t)(1) of this section.
(v) Determine the emission factor in
units of standard cubic feet per hour
component (scf/hr-component) by
dividing the sum of the volumetric flow
rate of natural gas determined in
paragraph (q)(4)(iv) of this section by
the total number of leak measurements
for that component type and leak
detection method combination.
(vi) You must update the emission
factor determined in (q)(4)(v) of this
section annually to include the results
from all complete leak surveys for
which leak measurement was performed
during the reporting year in accordance
with paragraph (q)(3) of this section.
(r) Equipment leaks by population
count. This paragraph (r) applies to
emissions sources listed in
§ 98.232(c)(21)(ii), (f)(7), (g)(5), (h)(6),
and (j)(10)(ii) if you are not required to
comply with paragraph (q) of this
section and if you do not elect to
comply with paragraph (q) of this
section for these components in lieu of
this paragraph (r). This paragraph (r)
also applies to emission sources listed
in § 98.232(i)(2) through (6), (j)(11), and
(m)(3) through (5). To be subject to the
requirements of this paragraph (r), the
listed emissions sources also must
contact streams with gas content greater
than 10 percent CH4 plus CO2 by
weight. Emissions sources that contact
streams with gas content less than or
equal to 10 percent CH4 plus CO2 by
weight are exempt from the
requirements of this paragraph (r) and
do not need to be reported. Tubing
systems equal to or less than one half
inch diameter are exempt from the
requirements of this paragraph (r) and
do not need to be reported. Equipment
leak components in vacuum service are
exempt from the survey and emission
estimation requirements of this
paragraph (r) and only the count of
these equipment must be reported. You
must calculate emissions from all
emission sources listed in this
paragraph (r) using Equation W–32A of
this section, except for natural gas
distribution facility emission sources
listed in § 98.232(i)(3). Natural gas
distribution facility emission sources
listed in § 98.232(i)(3) must calculate
emissions using Equation W–32B of this
section and according to paragraph
(r)(6)(ii) of this section.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
EP01AU23.031
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
Where:
Es,e,i = Annual volumetric emissions of GHGi
from the emission source type in
standard cubic feet. The emission source
type may be a major equipment (e.g.,
wellhead, separator), component (e.g.,
connector, open-ended line), below
grade metering-regulating station, below
grade transmission-distribution transfer
station, distribution main, distribution
service, gathering pipeline, transmission
company interconnect meteringregulating station, farm tap and/or direct
sale metering-regulating station, or
transmission pipeline.
Es,MR,i = Annual volumetric emissions of
GHGi from all meter/regulator runs at
above grade metering regulating stations
that are not above grade transmissiondistribution transfer stations or, when
used to calculate emissions according to
paragraph (q)(2)(xi) or (q)(3)(vii)(B) of
this section, the annual volumetric
emissions of GHGi from all meter/
regulator runs at above grade
transmission-distribution transfer
stations.
Counte = Total number of the emission
source type at the facility. Onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
facilities and onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities must count each major
equipment piece listed in Table W–1 to
this subpart. Onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities must also count the miles of
gathering pipelines by material type
(protected steel, unprotected steel,
plastic, or cast iron). Underground
natural gas storage facilities must count
each component listed in Table W–3 to
this subpart. LNG storage facilities must
count the number of vapor recovery
compressors. LNG import and export
facilities must count the number of vapor
recovery compressors. Natural gas
distribution facilities must count the: (1)
Number of distribution services by
material type; (2) miles of distribution
mains by material type; (3) number of
below grade transmission-distribution
transfer stations; and (4) number of
below grade metering-regulating stations;
as listed in Table W–5 to this subpart.
Onshore natural gas transmission
pipeline facilities must count the
following, as listed in Table W–5 to this
subpart: (1) Miles of transmission
pipelines by material type; (2) number of
transmission company interconnect
metering-regulating stations; and (3)
number of farm tap and/or direct sale
metering-regulating stations.
CountMR = Total number of meter/regulator
runs at above grade metering-regulating
stations that are not above grade
transmission-distribution transfer
stations or, when used to calculate
emissions according to paragraph
(q)(2)(xi) or (q)(3)(vii)(B) of this section,
the total number of meter/regulator runs
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
at above grade transmission-distribution
transfer stations.
EFs,e = Population emission factor for the
specific emission source type, as listed
in tables W–1, W–3, and W–5 to this
subpart.
EFs,MR,i = Meter/regulator run population
emission factor for GHGi based on all
surveyed above grade transmissiondistribution transfer stations over ‘‘n’’
years, in standard cubic feet of GHGi per
operational hour of all meter/regulator
runs, as determined in Equation W–31 of
this section.
GHGi = For onshore petroleum and natural
gas production facilities and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities, concentration of
GHGi, CH4, or CO2, in produced natural
gas as defined in paragraph (u)(2) of this
section; for onshore natural gas
transmission compression, underground
natural gas storage, and onshore natural
gas transmission pipeline, GHGi equals
0.975 for CH4 and 1.1 × 10¥2 for CO2; for
LNG storage and LNG import and export
equipment, GHGi equals 1 for CH4 and 0
for CO2; and for natural gas distribution,
GHGi equals 1 for CH4 and 1.1 × 10¥2
CO2.
Te = Average estimated time that each
emission source type associated with the
equipment leak emission was
operational in the calendar year, in
hours, using engineering estimate based
on best available data.
Tw,avg = Average estimated time that each
meter/regulator run was operational in
the calendar year, in hours per meter/
regulator run, using engineering estimate
based on best available data.
(1) Calculate both CH4 and CO2 mass
emissions from volumetric emissions
using calculations in paragraph (v) of
this section.
(2) Onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facilities and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities must use the
appropriate default whole gas
population emission factors listed in
table W–1 of this subpart. Major
equipment associated with gas wells are
considered gas service equipment in
table W–1 of this subpart. Onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities shall use the gas
service equipment emission factors in
table W–1 of this subpart. Major
equipment associated with crude oil
wells are considered crude service
equipment in table W–1 of this subpart.
Where facilities conduct EOR
operations, the emission factor listed in
table W–1 of this subpart shall be used
to estimate all streams of gases,
including recycle CO2 stream. For
meters/piping, use one meters/piping
per well-pad for onshore petroleum and
PO 00000
Frm 00128
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
natural gas production operations and
the number of meters in the facility for
onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting operations.
(3) Underground natural gas storage
facilities must use the appropriate
default total hydrocarbon population
emission factors for storage wellheads in
gas service listed in table W–3 to this
subpart.
(4) LNG storage facilities must use the
appropriate default methane population
emission factors for LNG storage
compressors in gas service listed in
table W–5 to this subpart.
(5) LNG import and export facilities
must use the appropriate default
methane population emission factors for
LNG terminal compressors in gas
service listed in table W–5 to this
subpart.
(6) Natural gas distribution facilities
must use the appropriate methane
emission factors as described in
paragraphs (r)(6)(i) and (ii) of this
section.
(i) Below grade transmissiondistribution transfer stations, below
grade metering-regulating stations,
distribution mains, and distribution
services must use the appropriate
default methane population emission
factors listed in table W–5 of this
subpart to estimate emissions from
components listed in § 98.232(i)(2), (4),
(5), and (6), respectively.
(ii) Above grade metering-regulating
stations that are not above grade
transmission-distribution transfer
stations must use the meter/regulator
run population emission factor
calculated in Equation W–31 for the
components listed in § 98.232(i)(3).
Natural gas distribution facilities that do
not have above grade transmissiondistribution transfer stations are not
required to calculate emissions for
above grade metering-regulating stations
and are not required to report GHG
emissions in § 98.236(r)(2)(v).
(7) Natural gas transmission pipeline
facilities must use the appropriate
default methane population emission
factors listed in table W–5 of this
subpart to estimate emissions from
components listed in § 98.232(m)(3)
through (5).
(s) Offshore petroleum and natural
gas production facilities. Report CO2,
CH4, and N2O emissions for offshore
petroleum and natural gas production
from all equipment leaks, vented
emission, and flare emission source
types as identified by BOEM in
compliance with 30 CFR 550.302
through 304.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
EP01AU23.032
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50408
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
(1) Offshore production facilities that
report to BOEM’s emissions inventory
shall report the same annual emissions
as calculated and reported to BOEM as
referenced in 30 CFR 550.302 through
304.
(i) For any reporting year that does
not coincide with a BOEM emissions
inventory data collection year, report
the most recent published BOEM
emissions inventory data referenced in
30 CFR 550.302 through 550.304. Adjust
emissions based on the operating time
for the facility relative to the operating
time in the most recent published
BOEM emissions inventory data.
(ii) As an alternative to the adjustment
provisions in paragraph (s)(1)(i) of this
section, you may use the most recent
monitoring and calculation methods
published by BOEM referenced in 30
CFR 550.302 through 550.304 to
calculate and report annual emissions.
(2) Offshore production facilities that
do not report to BOEM’s emissions
inventory must use the most recent
monitoring and calculation methods
published by BOEM referenced in 30
CFR 550.302 through 550.304 to
calculate and report annual emissions.
(i) For any reporting year that does
not coincide with a BOEM emissions
inventory data collection year, you may
report the most recent emissions data
submitted to demonstrate compliance
with this subpart of part 98, with
emissions adjusted based on the
operating time for the facility relative to
operating time in the previous reporting
period.
(ii) As an alternative to the adjustment
provisions in paragraph (s)(2)(i) of this
section, you may use the most recent
monitoring and calculation methods
published by BOEM referenced in 30
CFR 550.302 through 550.304 to
calculate and report annual emissions.
(3) If BOEM discontinues or delays
their data collection effort by more than
3 years, then offshore reporters shall
once in every 3 years use the most
recent BOEM data collection and
emissions estimation methods to
estimate emissions. These emission
estimates would be used to report
emissions from the facility sources as
required in paragraph (s)(1)(i) of this
section.
(4) For either first or subsequent year
reporting, offshore facilities either
within or outside of BOEM jurisdiction
that were not covered in the previous
BOEM data collection cycle must use
the most recent BOEM data collection
and emissions estimation methods
published by BOEM referenced in 30
CFR 550.302 through 550.304 to
calculate and report emissions.
(t) * * *
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
(2) * * *
*
*
*
*
*
Za = Compressibility factor at actual
conditions for GHGi. You may use
either a default compressibility
factor of 1, or a site-specific
compressibility factor based on
actual temperature and pressure
conditions.
*
*
*
*
*
(u) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) GHG mole fraction in feed natural
gas for all emissions sources upstream
of the de-methanizer or dew point
control and GHG mole fraction in
facility specific residue gas to
transmission pipeline systems for all
emissions sources downstream of the
de-methanizer overhead or dew point
control for onshore natural gas
processing facilities. For onshore natural
gas processing plants that solely
fractionate a liquid stream, use the GHG
mole percent in feed natural gas liquid
for all streams. If you have a continuous
gas composition analyzer on feed
natural gas, you must use these values
for determining the mole fraction. If you
do not have a continuous gas
composition analyzer, then annual
samples must be taken according to
methods set forth in § 98.234(b).
*
*
*
*
*
(y) Other large release events.
Calculate CO2 and CH4 emissions from
other large release events as specified in
paragraphs (y)(2) through (5) of this
section for each release that meets or
exceeds the applicable criteria in
paragraph (y)(1) of this section. You are
not required to measure every release
from your facility, but if you have
credible information that demonstrates
the release meets or exceeds one of the
thresholds or credible information that
the release may reasonably be
anticipated to meet or exceed (or to have
met or exceeded) one of the thresholds
in paragraph (y)(1) of this section, then
you must calculate the event emissions
and, if the thresholds are confirmed to
be exceeded, report the emissions as an
other large release event.
(1) You must report emissions for
other large release events that emit GHG
at or above any applicable threshold
listed in paragraphs (y)(1)(i) or (ii) of
this section considering the entire event
duration. The thresholds listed in
paragraphs (y)(1)(i) or (ii) of this section
are not limited to the emissions that
occur within a given reporting year.
(i) For sources not subject to reporting
under paragraphs (a) through (s), (w),
(x), (dd), or (ee) of this section (such as
but not limited to a fire, explosion, well
PO 00000
Frm 00129
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50409
blowout, or pressure relief), a release
that either:
(A) Emits methane at any point in
time at a rate of 100 kg/hr or greater; or
(B) Emits combined GHG across the
entire event duration of 250 metric tons
of CO2e or more.
(ii) For sources subject to reporting
under paragraphs (a) through (s), (w),
(x), (dd), or (ee) of this section, a release
that emits GHG at or above at least one
of the thresholds listed in paragraphs
(y)(1)(ii)(A) or (B) of this section. For a
release meeting the criteria in either
paragraph (y)(1)(ii)(A) or (B) of this
section, you must report the emissions
as an other large release event and
exclude the emissions from this release
in the source-specific emissions
calculated under paragraphs (a) through
(s), (w), (x), (dd), or (ee) of this section,
as applicable.
(A) Emits methane at any point in
time at a rate of 100 kg/hr or greater in
excess of the emissions calculated from
the source using the applicable methods
under paragraphs (a) through (s), (w),
(x), (dd), or (ee) of this section; or
(B) Emits combined GHG across the
entire event duration of 250 metric tons
of CO2e or more in excess of the
emissions calculated from the source
using the applicable methods under
paragraphs (a) through (s), (w), (x), (dd),
or (ee) of this section.
(2) Estimate the total volume of gas
released during the event in standard
cubic feet and the methane emission
rate at any point in time during the
event in kilograms per hour using
measurement data according to
§ 98.234(b), if available, or a
combination of process knowledge,
engineering estimates, and best
available data when measurement data
are not available according to
paragraphs (y)(2)(i) through (v) of this
section.
(i) The total volume of gas released
must be estimated as the product of the
measured or estimated average flow or
release rate and the estimated event
duration. For events for which
information is available showing
variable or decaying flow rates, you
must calculate the maximum natural gas
flow or release rate during the event and
either determine a representative
average release rate across the entire
event or determine representative
release rates for specific time periods
within the event duration. If you elect
to determine representative release rates
for specific time periods within the
event duration, calculate the volume of
gas released for each time period within
the event duration as the product of the
representative release rate and the
length of the corresponding time period
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50410
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
and sum the volume of gas released
across each of the time periods for the
full duration of the event.
(ii) The start time of the event must
be determined based on monitored
process parameters. If monitored
process parameters cannot identify the
start of the event, the event must be
assumed to start on the date of the most
recent monitoring or measurement
survey that confirms the source was not
emitting at or above the rates specified
in paragraph (y)(1) of this section or
assumed to have a duration of 182 days,
whichever duration is shorter.
(iii) The end time of the event must
be the date of the confirmed repair or
confirmed cessation of emissions.
(iv) For the purposes of paragraph
(y)(2)(ii) of this section, ‘‘monitoring or
measurement survey’’ includes any
monitoring or measurement method in
§ 98.234(a) through (d) as well as
advanced screening methods such as
monitoring systems mounted on
vehicles, drones, helicopters, airplanes,
or satellites capable of identifying
emissions at the thresholds specified in
paragraph (y)(1).
(v) For events that span two different
reporting years, calculate the portion of
the event’s volumetric emissions
calculated according to paragraph
(y)(2)(i) of this section that occurred in
each reporting year considering only
reporting year 2025 and later reporting
years. For events with consistent flow or
for which one average emissions rate is
used, use the relative duration of the
event within each reporting year to
apportion the volume of gas released for
each reporting year. For variable flow
events for which the volume of gas
released is estimated for separate time
periods, sum the volume of gas released
across each of the time periods within
a given reporting year separately. If one
of the time periods span two different
reporting years, calculate the portion of
the volumetric emissions calculated for
that time period that applies to each
reporting year based on the number of
hours in that time period within each
reporting year.
(3) Determine the composition of the
gas released to the atmosphere using
measurement data, if available, or a
combination of process knowledge,
engineering estimates, and best
available data when measurement data
are not available. In the event of an
explosion or fire, where a portion of the
natural gas may be combusted, estimate
the composition of the gas released to
the atmosphere considering the fraction
of natural gas released directly to the
atmosphere and the fraction of natural
gas that was combusted by the
explosion or fire during the release
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
event. Assume a maximum combustion
efficiency of 92 percent for natural gas
that is combusted in an explosion or fire
when estimating the CO2 composition of
the release. You may use different
compositions for different periods
within the duration if available
information suggests composition varied
during the release (e.g., if a portion of
the release occurred while fire was
present and a portion of the release
occurred when no fire was present).
(4) Calculate the GHG volumetric
emissions using Equation W–35 in
paragraph (u)(1) of this section.
(5) Calculate both CH4 and CO2 mass
emissions from volumetric emissions
using calculations in paragraph (v) of
this section.
(z) Onshore petroleum and natural
gas production, onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting, and
natural gas distribution combustion
emissions. Except as specified in
paragraphs (z)(6) and (7) of this section,
calculate CO2, CH4, and N2O
combustion-related emissions from
stationary or portable equipment using
the applicable method in paragraphs
(z)(1) through (3) of this section
according to the fuel combusted as
specified in those paragraphs:
(1) If a fuel combusted in the
stationary or portable equipment meets
the specifications of paragraph (z)(1)(i)
of this section, then calculate emissions
according to paragraph (z)(1)(ii) of this
section.
(i) The fuel combusted in the
stationary or portable equipment is
listed in table C–1 of subpart C of this
part or is a blend in which all fuels are
listed in table C–1. If the fuel is natural
gas or the blend contains natural gas,
the natural gas must also meet the
criteria of paragraphs (z)(1)(i)(A) and (B)
of this section.
(A) The natural gas must be of
pipeline quality specification.
(B) The natural gas must have a
minimum higher heating value of 950
Btu per standard cubic foot.
(ii) For fuels listed in paragraph
(z)(1)(i) of this section, calculate CO2,
CH4, and N2O emissions for each unit or
group of units combusting the same fuel
according to any Tier listed in subpart
C of this part, except that each natural
gas-fired reciprocating internal
combustion engine or gas turbine must
use one of the methods in paragraph
(z)(4) of this section to quantify a CH4
emission factor instead of using the CH4
emission factor in table C–2 of subpart
C of this part. You must follow all
applicable calculation requirements for
that tier listed in § 98.33, any
monitoring or QA/QC requirements
listed for that tier in § 98.34, any
PO 00000
Frm 00130
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
missing data procedures specified in
§ 98.35, and any recordkeeping
requirements specified in § 98.37. You
must report emissions according to
paragraph (z)(5) of this section.
(2) If a fuel combusted in the
stationary or portable equipment meets
the specifications of paragraph (z)(2)(i)
of this section, then calculate emissions
according to paragraph (z)(2)(ii) of this
section.
(i) The fuel combusted in the
stationary or portable equipment is
natural gas that is not pipeline quality
or it is a blend containing natural gas
that is not pipeline quality with only
fuels that are listed in table C–1. The
natural gas must meet the criteria of
paragraphs (z)(2)(i)(A) through (C) of
this section.
(A) The natural gas must have a
minimum higher heating value of 950
Btu per standard cubic foot.
(B) The natural gas must have a
maximum CO2 content of 1 percent by
volume.
(C) The natural gas must have a
minimum CH4 content of 85 percent by
volume.
(ii) For fuels listed in paragraph
(z)(2)(i) of this section, calculate CO2,
CH4, and N2O emissions for each unit or
group of units combusting the same fuel
according to Tier 2, Tier 3, or Tier 4
listed in subpart C of this part, except
that each natural gas-fired reciprocating
engine or gas turbine must use one of
the methods in paragraph (z)(4) of this
section to quantify a CH4 emission
factor instead of using the CH4 emission
factor in table C–2 of subpart C of this
part. You must follow all applicable
calculation requirements for that tier
listed in § 98.33, any monitoring or QA/
QC requirements listed for that tier in
§ 98.34, any missing data procedures
specified in § 98.35, and any
recordkeeping requirements specified in
§ 98.37. You must report emissions
according to paragraph (z)(5) of this
section.
(3) If a fuel combusted in the
stationary or portable equipment meets
the specifications of paragraph (z)(3)(i)
of this section, then calculate emissions
according to paragraph (z)(3)(ii) of this
section.
(i) The fuel combusted in the
stationary or portable equipment does
not meet the criteria of either paragraph
(z)(1)(i) or (z)(2)(i) of this section.
Examples include natural gas that is not
of pipeline quality, natural gas that has
a higher heating value of less than 950
Btu per standard cubic feet, and natural
gas that is not pipeline quality and does
not meet the composition criteria of
either paragraph (z)(2)(i)(B) or (C) of this
section. Other examples include field
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
in the unit or group of units during the
reporting year.
(B) If you have a continuous gas
composition analyzer on fuel to the
combustion unit(s), you must use these
compositions for determining the
concentration of each constituent in the
flow of gas to the unit or group of units.
If you do not have a continuous gas
composition analyzer on gas to the
combustion unit(s), you may use
engineering estimates based on best
available data to determine the
concentration of each constituent in the
flow of gas to the unit or group of units.
Otherwise, you must use the
appropriate gas compositions for each
stream going to the combustion unit(s)
as specified in paragraph (u)(2) of this
section.
(C) Calculate GHG volumetric
emissions at actual conditions using
Equations W–39A and W–39B of this
section:
Where:
Ea,CO2 = Contribution of annual CO2
emissions from portable or stationary
fuel combustion sources in cubic feet,
under actual conditions.
Va = Volume of gas sent to the combustion
unit or group of units in actual cubic
feet, during the year.
YCO2 = Mole fraction of CO2 in gas sent to
the combustion unit or group of units.
h = Fraction of gas combusted for portable
and stationary equipment determined
using engineering estimation. For
internal combustion devices that are not
reciprocating internal combustion
engines or gas turbines, a default of 0.995
can be used. For two-stroke lean-burn
reciprocating internal combustion
engines, a default of 0.953 must be used;
for four-stroke lean-burn reciprocating
internal combustion engines, a default of
0.962 must be used; for four-stroke richburn reciprocating internal combustion
engines, a default of 0.997 must be used,
and for gas turbines, a default of 0.999
must be used.
Yj = Mole fraction of hydrocarbon constituent
j (such as methane, ethane, propane,
butane, and pentanes plus) in gas sent to
the combustion unit or group of units.
Rj = Number of carbon atoms in the
hydrocarbon constituent j in gas sent to
the combustion unit or group of units; 1
for methane, 2 for ethane, 3 for propane,
4 for butane, and 5 for pentanes plus.
Ea,CH4 = Contribution of annual CH4
emissions from portable or stationary
fuel combustion sources in cubic feet,
under actual conditions.
YCH4 = Mole fraction of methane in gas sent
to the combustion unit or group of units.
(D) Calculate GHG volumetric
emissions at standard conditions using
calculations in paragraph (t) of this
section.
(E) Calculate both combustion-related
CH4 and CO2 mass emissions from
volumetric CH4 and CO2 emissions
using calculation in paragraph (v) of this
section.
(F) Calculate N2O mass emissions
using Equation W–40 of this section.
Where:
MassN2O = Annual N2O emissions from the
combustion of a particular type of fuel
(metric tons).
Fuel = Annual mass or volume of the fuel
combusted (mass or volume per year,
choose appropriately to be consistent
with the units of HHV).
HHV = Site-specific higher heating value of
the fuel, mmBtu/unit of the fuel (in units
consistent with the fuel quantity
combusted).
EF = Use 1.0 × 10¥4 kg N2O/mmBtu.
1 × 10¥3 = Conversion factor from kilograms
to metric tons.
required to or elect to use the method
in paragraph (z)(4)(i) of this section, you
must use the results of the performance
test to determine the CH4 emission
factor.
(i) Conduct a performance test
following the applicable procedures in
§ 98.234(i).
(ii) Original equipment manufacturer
information, which may include
manufacturer specification sheets,
emissions certification data, or other
manufacturer data providing expected
emission rates from the reciprocating
internal combustion engine or gas
turbine.
(iii) Applicable equipment typespecific emission factor from table W–
7 of this subpart.
(5) Emissions from fuel combusted in
stationary or portable equipment at
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facilities, at onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities, and at natural gas
distribution facilities that are calculated
according to the procedures in either
paragraph (z)(1)(ii) or (z)(2)(ii) of this
section must be reported according to
the requirements specified in § 98.236(z)
rather than the reporting requirements
specified in subpart C of this part.
(6) External fuel combustion sources
with a rated heat capacity equal to or
less than 5 mmBtu/hr do not need to
report combustion emissions or include
these emissions for threshold
determination in § 98.231(a). You must
report the type and number of each
external fuel combustion unit.
(7) Internal fuel combustion sources,
not compressor-drivers, with a rated
heat capacity equal to or less than 1
mmBtu/hr (or the equivalent of 130
horsepower), do not need to report
combustion emissions or include these
(4) For each natural gas-fired
reciprocating internal combustion
engine or gas turbine calculating
emissions according to paragraph
(z)(1)(ii) or (z)(2)(ii) of this section, you
must determine a CH4 emission factor
(kg CH4/MMBtu) using one of the
methods provided in paragraphs (z)(4)(i)
through (iii) of this section. If you are
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00131
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
EP01AU23.034
gas that does not meet the definition of
natural gas in § 98.238 and blends
containing field gas that does not meet
the definition of natural gas in § 98.238.
(ii) For fuels listed in paragraph
(z)(3)(i) of this section, calculate
combustion emissions for each unit or
group of units combusting the same fuel
as follows:
(A) You may use company records to
determine the volume of fuel combusted
EP01AU23.035
50411
EP01AU23.033
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
emissions for threshold determination
in § 98.231(a). You must report the type
and number of each internal fuel
combustion unit.
(aa) through (cc) [Reserved]
(dd) Drilling mud degassing. Calculate
annual volumetric CH4 emissions from
the degassing of drilling mud using one
of the calculation methods described in
paragraphs (dd)(1) or (2) of this section.
If you have taken mudlogging
measurements, including gas trapderived gas concentration and mud
pumping rate, you must use Calculation
Method 1 as described in paragraph
(dd)(1) of this section. If you have not
taken mudlogging measurements, you
may use Calculation Method 2 as
described in paragraph (dd)(2) of this
section.
(1) Calculation Method 1. For each
well in the sub-basin in which drilling
mud was used during well drilling, you
must calculate CH4 emissions from
drilling mud degassing applying an
emissions rate derived from a
representative well in the same subbasin and at the same approximate total
depth. You must follow the procedures
specified in paragraph (dd)(1)(i) of this
section to calculate CH4 emissions for
the representative well and follow the
procedures in paragraphs (dd)(1)(ii)
through (iv) of this section to calculate
CH4 emissions for every well drilled in
the sub-basin and at the same
approximate total depth.
(i) Calculate CH4 emissions from mud
degassing for one representative well in
each sub-basin and at each approximate
total depth. For the representative well,
you must use mudlogging
measurements, including gas trap
derived gas concentration and mud
pumping rate, taken during the
reporting year. In the first year of
reporting, you may use measurements
from the prior reporting year if
measurements from the current
reporting year are not available. Use
Equation W–41 of this section to
calculate natural gas emissions from
mud degassing at the representative
well. You must identify and calculate
CH4 emissions for a new representative
well for the sub-basin and same
approximate total depth every 2
calendar years or on a more frequent
basis. If a representative well is not
available in the same sub-basin and at
the same targeted approximate total
depth, you may choose a well within
the facility that is drilled into the same
formation and at the same approximate
total depth.
Where:
Es,CH4,r = Annual total volumetric CH4
emissions from mud degassing for the
representative well, r, in standard cubic
feet.
MRr = Average mud rate for the
representative well, r, in gallons per
minute.
Tr = Total time that drilling mud is circulated
in the representative well, r, in minutes.
Xn = Concentration of natural gas in the
drilling mud as measured by the gas trap,
in parts per million.
GHGCH4 = Measured mole fraction of CH4 in
natural gas entrained in the drilling mud.
0.1337 = Conversion from gallons to standard
cubic feet.
Where:
ERs,CH4,r = Volumetric CH4 emission rate from
mud degassing for the representative
well, r, in standard cubic feet per
minute.
Es,CH4,r = Annual total volumetric CH4
emissions from mud degassing for the
representative well, r, in standard cubic
feet.
Tr = Total time that drilling mud is circulated
in the representative well, r, in minutes.
(iii) Use Equation W–43 of this
section to calculate emissions for any
wells drilled in the same sub-basin and
targeting the same approximate total
depth in the reporting year.
Where:
Es,CH4,p = Annual total CH4 emissions from
mud degassing for the well, p, in
standard cubic feet.
ERs,CH4,r = Volumetric CH4 emission rate from
mud degassing for the representative
well, r, in standard cubic feet per
minute.
Tp = Total time that drilling mud is
circulated in the well, p, during the
reporting year, in minutes.
(2) Calculation Method 2. If you did
not take mudlogging measurements,
calculate emissions from mud degassing
for each well using Equation W–44 of
this section:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
EFCH4 = Emission factor in metric tons CH4
per drilling day. Use 0.2605 for waterbased drilling muds, 0.0586 for oil-based
PO 00000
Frm 00132
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
EP01AU23.039
EP01AU23.038
drilling muds, and 0.0586 for synthetic
drilling muds.
DDp = Total number of drilling days for the
well, p. The first drilling day is the day
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
EP01AU23.037
Where:
MassCH4,p = Annual total CH4 emissions for
the well, p, in metric tons.
(iv) Calculate CH4 mass emissions
using calculations in paragraph (v) of
this section.
(ii) Calculate the emissions rate of
CH4 in standard cubic feet per minute
from the representative well using
Equation W–42 of this section.
EP01AU23.036
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50412
that the borehole penetrated the first
hydrocarbon-bearing zone and the last
drilling day is the day drilling mud
ceases to be circulated in the wellbore.
Where:
ECH4 = Annual total volumetric emissions of
CH4 from crankcase venting on
reciprocating internal combustion
engines or gas turbines, in standard
cubic feet.
EF = Emission factor for crankcase venting on
reciprocating internal combustion
engines or gas turbines, in standard
cubic feet gas per hour per crankcase
vent. Use 2.28 standard cubic feet gas per
hour per crankcase vent.
GHGCH4 = Average concentration of CH4 in
the gas stream entering reciprocating
internal combustion engines or gas
turbines. If the concentration of CH4 is
unknown, use the concentration of CH4
in the gas stream either using
engineering estimates based on best
available data or as defined in paragraph
(u)(2) of this section.
Count = Total number of crankcase vents on
reciprocating internal combustion
engines or gas turbines.
T = Total operating hours per year for
reciprocating internal combustion
engines or gas turbines with crankcase
vents.
13. Amend § 98.234 by:
a. Revising the introductory text and
paragraphs (a) and (d)(3);
■ b. Adding paragraph (d)(5);
■ c. Removing the text ‘‘Equation W–
41’’ and ‘‘Eq. W–41’’ in paragraph (e)
and adding in its place the text
‘‘Equation W–46’’ and ‘‘Eq. W–46’’,
respectively;
■ d. Removing and reserving paragraphs
(f) and (g); and
■ e. Adding paragraph (i).
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
■
■
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
§ 98.234 Monitoring and QA/QC
requirements.
The GHG emissions data for
petroleum and natural gas emissions
sources must be quality assured as
applicable as specified in this section.
Offshore petroleum and natural gas
production facilities shall adhere to the
monitoring and QA/QC requirements as
set forth in 30 CFR 550.
(a) You must use any of the applicable
methods described in paragraphs (a)(1)
through (5) of this section to conduct
leak detection(s) or screening survey(s)
as specified in § 98.233(k), (o), and (p)
that occur during a calendar year. You
must use any of the methods described
in paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of this
section to conduct leak detection(s) of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
50413
(ee) Crankcase venting. For
reciprocating internal combustion
engines or gas turbines, calculate annual
CH4 volumetric emissions from
crankcase venting at standard
conditions using Equation W–45 of this
section:
equipment leaks from components as
specified in § 98.233(q)(1)(i) or (ii) or
(q)(1)(v)(A) that occur during a calendar
year. You must use one of the methods
described in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) or (iii)
or (a)(2)(ii) of this section, as applicable,
to conduct leak detection(s) of
equipment leaks from components as
specified in § 98.233(q)(1)(iii) or
(q)(1)(v)(B). If electing to comply with
§ 98.233(q) as specified in
§ 98.233(q)(1)(iv), you must use any of
the methods described in paragraphs
(a)(1) through (5) of this section to
conduct leak detection(s) of equipment
leaks from component types as specified
in § 98.233(q)(1)(iv) that occur during a
calendar year. Inaccessible emissions
sources, as defined in 40 CFR part 60,
are not exempt from this subpart. If the
primary leak detection method
employed cannot be used to monitor
inaccessible components without
elevating the monitoring personnel
more than 2 meters above a support
surface, you must use alternative leak
detection devices as described in
paragraph (a)(1) or (3) of this section to
monitor inaccessible equipment leaks or
vented emissions at least once per
calendar year.
(1) Optical gas imaging instrument.
Use an optical gas imaging instrument
for equipment leak detection as
specified in either paragraph (a)(1)(i),
(ii), or (iii) of this section. You may use
any of the methods as specified in
paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (iii) of this
section unless you are required to use a
specific method in § 98.233(q)(1).
(i) Optical gas imaging instrument as
specified in § 60.18 of this chapter. Use
an optical gas imaging instrument for
equipment leak detection in accordance
with 40 CFR part 60, subpart A, § 60.18
of the Alternative work practice for
monitoring equipment leaks,
§ 60.18(i)(1)(i); § 60.18(i)(2)(i) except
that the minimum monitoring frequency
shall be annual using the detection
sensitivity level of 60 grams per hour as
stated in 40 CFR part 60, subpart A,
Table 1: Detection Sensitivity Levels;
§ 60.18(i)(2)(ii) and (iii) except the gas
chosen shall be methane, and
§ 60.18(i)(2)(iv) and (v); § 60.18(i)(3);
§ 60.18(i)(4)(i) and (v); including the
requirements for daily instrument
checks and distances, and excluding
requirements for video records. Any
emissions detected by the optical gas
imaging instrument from an applicable
component is a leak. In addition, you
must operate the optical gas imaging
instrument to image the source types
required by this subpart in accordance
with the instrument manufacturer’s
operating parameters.
(ii) Optical gas imaging instrument as
specified in § 60.5397a of this chapter.
Use an optical gas imaging instrument
for equipment leak detection in
accordance with § 60.5397a(c)(3) and
(7), and (e) of this chapter and
paragraphs (a)(1)(ii)(A) through (C) of
this section.
(A) For the purposes of this subpart,
any visible emissions observed by the
optical gas imaging instrument from a
component required or elected to be
monitored as specified in § 98.233(q)(1)
is a leak.
(B) For the purposes of this subpart,
the term ‘‘fugitive emissions
component’’ in § 60.5397a of this
chapter means ‘‘component.’’
(C) For the purpose of complying with
§ 98.233(q)(1)(iv), the phrase ‘‘the
collection of fugitive emissions
components at well sites and
compressor stations’’ in § 60.5397a of
this chapter means ‘‘the collection of
components for which you elect to
comply with § 98.233(q)(1)(iv).’’
(iii) Optical gas imaging instrument as
specified in appendix K to part 60 of
this chapter. Use an optical gas imaging
instrument for equipment leak detection
in accordance with appendix K to part
60, Determination of Volatile Organic
Compound and Greenhouse Gas Leaks
Using Optical Gas Imaging. Any
emissions detected by the optical gas
imaging instrument from an applicable
component is a leak.
(2) Method 21. Use the equipment
leak detection methods in Method 21 in
appendix A–7 to part 60 of this chapter
as specified in paragraph (a)(2)(i) or (ii)
of this section. You may use either of
the methods as specified in paragraphs
(a)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section unless
you are required to use a specific
method in § 98.233(q)(1). You must
survey all applicable source types at the
facility needed to conduct a complete
equipment leak survey as defined in
§ 98.233(q)(1). For the purposes of this
subpart, the term ‘‘fugitive emissions
PO 00000
Frm 00133
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
EP01AU23.040
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50414
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
component’’ in § 60.5397a of this
chapter and § 60.5397b of this chapter
means ‘‘component.’’
(i) Method 21 with a leak definition of
10,000 ppm. Use the equipment leak
detection methods in Method 21 in
appendix A–7 to part 60 of this chapter
using methane as the reference
compound. If an instrument reading of
10,000 ppm or greater is measured for
any applicable component, a leak is
detected.
(ii) Method 21 with a leak definition
of 500 ppm. Use the equipment leak
detection methods in Method 21 in
appendix A–7 to part 60 of this chapter
using methane as the reference
compound. If an instrument reading of
500 ppm or greater is measured for any
applicable component, a leak is
detected.
(3) Infrared laser beam illuminated
instrument. Use an infrared laser beam
illuminated instrument for equipment
leak detection. Any emissions detected
by the infrared laser beam illuminated
instrument is a leak. In addition, you
must operate the infrared laser beam
illuminated instrument to detect the
source types required by this subpart in
accordance with the instrument
manufacturer’s operating parameters.
(4) [Reserved]
(5) Acoustic leak detection device.
Use the acoustic leak detection device to
detect through-valve leakage. When
using the acoustic leak detection device
to quantify the through-valve leakage,
you must use the instrument
manufacturer’s calculation methods to
quantify the through-valve leak. When
using the acoustic leak detection device,
if a leak of 3.1 scf per hour or greater
is calculated, a leak is detected. In
addition, you must operate the acoustic
leak detection device to monitor the
source valves required by this subpart in
accordance with the instrument
manufacturer’s operating parameters.
Acoustic stethoscope type devices
designed to detect through-valve leakage
when put in contact with the valve body
and that provide an audible leak signal
but do not calculate a leak rate can be
used to identify through-valve leakage.
For these acoustic stethoscope type
devices, a leak is detected if an audible
leak signal is observed or registered by
the device. If the acoustic stethoscope
type device is used as a screening to a
measurement method and a leak is
detected, the leak must be measured
using any one of the methods specified
in paragraphs (b) through (d) of this
section.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) * * *
(3) For high volume samplers that
output methane mass emissions, you
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
must use the calculations in § 98.233(u)
and (v) in reverse to determine the
natural gas volumetric emissions at
standard conditions. For high volume
samplers that output methane
volumetric flow in actual conditions,
divide the volumetric methane flow rate
by the mole fraction of methane in the
natural gas according to the provisions
in § 98.233(u) and estimate natural gas
volumetric emissions at standard
conditions using calculations in
§ 98.233(t). Estimate CH4 and CO2
volumetric and mass emissions from
volumetric natural gas emissions using
the calculations in § 98.233(u) and (v).
*
*
*
*
*
(5) If the measured methane flow
exceeds the manufacturer’s reported
quantitation limit or if the measured
natural gas flow determined as specified
in paragraph (d)(3) of this section
exceeds 70 percent of the
manufacturer’s reported maximum
sampling flow rate, then the flow
exceeds the capacity of the instrument
and you must either use a temporary or
permanent flow meter according to
paragraph (b) of this section or use
calibrated bags according to paragraph
(c) of this section to determine the leak
or flow rate.
*
*
*
*
*
(i) You must use any of the applicable
methods described in paragraphs (j)(1)
through (3) of this section to conduct a
performance test to determine the
concentration of CH4 in the exhaust gas.
This concentration must be used to
develop a CH4 emission factor (kg/
MMBtu) for estimating combustion slip
from reciprocating internal combustion
engines or gas turbines as specified in
§ 98.233(z)(4). Each performance test
must be conducted within 10 percent of
100 percent peak load. You may not
conduct performance tests during
period of startup, shutdown or
malfunction. You must conduct three
separate test runs for each performance
test. Each test run must be conducted
within 10 percent of 100 percent peak
(or the highest achievable) load and last
at least 1 hour.
(1) EPA Method 18, Volatile Organic
Compounds by Gas Chromatography in
appendix A–6 to part 60 of this chapter.
(2) EPA Method 320, Measurement of
Vapor Phase Organic and Inorganic
Emissions by Extractive Fourier
Transform Infrared (FTIR) Spectroscopy
in appendix A to part 63 of this chapter.
(3) ASTM D6348–12 Standard Test
Method for Determination of Gaseous
Compounds by Extractive Direct
Interface Fourier Transform Infrared
(FTIR) Spectroscopy (incorporated by
reference, see § 98.7).
PO 00000
Frm 00134
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
14. Amend § 98.235 by revising
paragraph (f) to read as follows:
■
§ 98.235 Procedures for estimating
missing data.
*
*
*
*
*
(f) For the first 6 months of required
data collection, facilities that are
currently subject to this subpart W and
that start up new emission sources or
acquire new sources from another
facility that were not previously subject
to this subpart W may use best
engineering estimates for any data
related to those newly operating or
newly acquired sources that cannot
reasonably be measured or obtained
according to the requirements of this
subpart.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 15. Amend § 98.236 by:
■ a. Revising the introductory text and
paragraph (a) introductory text,
paragraphs (a)(1) through (8), (a)(9)
introductory text, (a)(9)(iii), (vi), and
(xii);
■ b. Adding paragraphs (a)(9)(xiii) and
(xiv);
■ c. Revising paragraphs (a)(10), (b), (c),
(d), (e), (f)(1) introductory text, (f)(1)(i)
through (vii), and (f)(1)(xi) introductory
text;
■ d. Adding paragraph (f)(1)(xi)(F);
■ e. Revising paragraph (f)(1)(xii)
introductory text;
■ f. Adding paragraph (f)(1)(xii)(F);
■ g. Revising paragraphs (f)(2)
introductory text and (f)(2)(i), (iii)
through (v), (ix), and (x);
■ h. Adding paragraphs (f)(2)(xi) and
(xii);
■ i. Revising paragraphs (g) introductory
text, (g)(1) through (3), (g)(5)(i) through
(iii), (g)(6) and (10), (h)(1) introductory
text, (h)(1)(i), (iii), and (iv), (h)(2)
introductory text, (h)(2)(i), (iii), and (iv);
■ j. Removing paragraphs (h)(2)(v)
through (vii);
■ k. Revising paragraphs (h)(3)
introductory text, (h)(3)(i), (h)(4), (i)
introductory text, and (i)(1) introductory
text;
■ l. Redesignating paragraphs (i)(1)(i)
through (iii) as (i)(1)(ii) through (iv),
respectively;
■ m. Adding new paragraph (i)(1)(i);
■ n. Revising paragraph (i)(2), (j), (k)
introductory text, (k)(1), (k)(2)
introductory text, and (k)(2)(i);
■ o. Removing paragraph (k)(3);
■ p. Revising paragraphs (l)(1)
introductory text, (l)(1)(i) through (v),
(l)(2), (l)(3) introductory text, (l)(3)(i)
through (iv), (l)(4), (m) introductory text,
and (m)(1) and (4) through (7);
■ q. Removing paragraph (m)(8);
■ r. Revising paragraphs (n), (o)
introductory text, (o)(1), (o)(2)(i)(A) and
(B), (o)(2)(ii)(A), (o)(2)(ii)(D)
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
introductory text, (o)(2)(ii)(E), (o)(5), (p)
introductory text, (p)(1), (p)(2)(ii)(A),
(p)(2)(ii)(D) introductory text,
(p)(2)(ii)(E), (p)(3)(ii) introductory text,
(p)(5), (q) introductory text, (q)(1) and
(2), (r) introductory text, (r)(1) and (3),
(s), (x)(1), (y), (z), (aa) introductory text,
(aa)(1) introductory text, (aa)(1)(i)
introductory text, and (aa)(1)(i)(B) and
(C);
■ s. Adding paragraph (aa)(1)(i)(D);
■ t. Revising paragraphs (aa)(1)(ii)(D)
through (H);
■ u. Adding paragraph (aa)(1)(iii) and
(iv);
■ v. Revising paragraphs (aa)(2), (aa)(3)
introductory text, and (aa)(3)(i);
■ w. Adding paragraphs (aa)(3)(viii) and
(ix);
■ x. Revising paragraphs (aa)(4)(i),
(aa)(5)(ii), (aa)(6) and (7), and (aa)(8)(ii);
■ y. Removing and reserving paragraph
(aa)(9);
■ z. Revising paragraphs (aa)(10)
introductory text and (aa)(10)(ii) and
(iv);
■ aa. Adding paragraph (aa)(10)(v);
■ bb. Revising paragraphs (aa)(11)(ii)
through (iv), (bb) introductory text, and
(cc); and
■ cc. Adding paragraphs (dd) and (ee).
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
§ 98.236
Data reporting requirements.
In addition to the information
required by § 98.3(c), each annual report
must contain reported emissions and
related information as specified in this
section. Reporters that use a flow or
volume measurement system that
corrects to standard conditions as
provided in the introductory text in
§ 98.233 for data elements that are
otherwise required to be determined at
actual conditions, report gas volumes at
standard conditions rather than the gas
volumes at actual conditions and report
the standard temperature and pressure
used by the measurement system rather
than the actual temperature and
pressure.
(a) The annual report must include
the information specified in paragraphs
(a)(1) through (10) of this section for
each applicable industry segment. The
annual report must also include annual
emissions totals, in metric tons of each
GHG, for each applicable industry
segment listed in paragraphs (a)(1)
through (10) of this section, and each
applicable emission source listed in
paragraphs (b) through (z), (dd) and (ee)
of this section.
(1) Onshore petroleum and natural
gas production. For the equipment/
activities specified in paragraphs
(a)(1)(i) through (xxii) of this section,
report the information specified in the
applicable paragraphs of this section.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
(i) Natural gas pneumatic devices.
Report the information specified in
paragraph (b) of this section.
(ii) Natural gas driven pneumatic
pumps. Report the information specified
in paragraph (c) of this section.
(iii) Acid gas removal units and
nitrogen removal units. Report the
information specified in paragraph (d)
of this section.
(iv) Dehydrators. Report the
information specified in paragraph (e) of
this section.
(v) Liquids unloading. Report the
information specified in paragraph (f) of
this section.
(vi) Completions and workovers with
hydraulic fracturing. Report the
information specified in paragraph (g) of
this section.
(vii) Completions and workovers
without hydraulic fracturing. Report the
information specified in paragraph (h)
of this section.
(viii) Blowdown vent stacks. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(i) of this section.
(ix) Hydrocarbon liquids and
produced water storage tanks. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(j) of this section.
(x) Well testing. Report the
information specified in paragraph (l) of
this section.
(xi) Associated natural gas. Report the
information specified in paragraph (m)
of this section.
(xii) Flare stacks. Report the
information specified in paragraph (n)
of this section.
(xiii) Centrifugal compressors. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(o) of this section.
(xiv) Reciprocating compressors.
Report the information specified in
paragraph (p) of this section.
(xv) Equipment leak surveys. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(q) of this section.
(xvi) Equipment leaks by population
count. Report the information specified
in paragraph (r) of this section.
(xvii) EOR injection pumps. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(w) of this section.
(xviii) EOR hydrocarbon liquids.
Report the information specified in
paragraph (x) of this section.
(xix) Other large release events.
Report the information specified in
paragraph (y) of this section.
(xx) Combustion equipment. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(z) of this section.
(xxi) Drilling mud degassing. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(dd) of this section.
(xxii) Crankcase vents. Reporting the
information specified in paragraph (ee)
of this section.
PO 00000
Frm 00135
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50415
(2) Offshore petroleum and natural
gas production. For the equipment/
activities specified in paragraphs
(a)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section, report
the information specified in the
applicable paragraphs of this section.
(i) Offshore petroleum and natural gas
production. Report the information
specified in paragraph (s) of this section.
(ii) Other large release events. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(y) of this section.
(3) Onshore natural gas processing.
For the equipment/activities specified
in paragraphs (a)(3)(i) through (xi) of
this section, report the information
specified in the applicable paragraphs of
this section.
(i) Natural gas pneumatic devices.
Report the information specified in
paragraph (b) of this section.
(ii) Acid gas removal units and
nitrogen removal units. Report the
information specified in paragraph (d)
of this section.
(iii) Dehydrators. Report the
information specified in paragraph (e) of
this section.
(iv) Blowdown vent stacks. Report the
information specified in paragraph (i) of
this section.
(v) Hydrocarbon liquids and produced
water storage tanks. Report the
information specified in paragraph (j) of
this section.
(vi) Flare stacks. Report the
information specified in paragraph (n)
of this section.
(vii) Centrifugal compressors. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(o) of this section.
(viii) Reciprocating compressors.
Report the information specified in
paragraph (p) of this section.
(ix) Equipment leak surveys. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(q) of this section.
(x) Other large release events. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(y) of this section.
(xi) Crankcase vents. Report the
information specified in paragraph (ee)
of this section.
(4) Onshore natural gas transmission
compression. For the equipment/
activities specified in paragraphs
(a)(4)(i) through (x) of this section,
report the information specified in the
applicable paragraphs of this section.
(i) Natural gas pneumatic devices.
Report the information specified in
paragraph (b) of this section.
(ii) Dehydrators. Report the
information specified in paragraph (e) of
this section.
(iii) Blowdown vent stacks. Report the
information specified in paragraph (i) of
this section.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50416
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
(iv) Condensate storage tanks. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(k) of this section.
(v) Flare stacks. Report the
information specified in paragraph (n)
of this section.
(vi) Centrifugal compressors. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(o) of this section.
(vii) Reciprocating compressors.
Report the information specified in
paragraph (p) of this section.
(viii) Equipment leak surveys. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(q) of this section.
(ix) Other large release events. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(y) of this section.
(x) Crankcase vents. Reporting the
information specified in paragraph (ee)
of this section.
(5) Underground natural gas storage.
For the equipment/activities specified
in paragraphs (a)(5)(i) through (xi) of
this section, report the information
specified in the applicable paragraphs of
this section.
(i) Natural gas pneumatic devices.
Report the information specified in
paragraph (b) of this section.
(ii) Dehydrators. Report the
information specified in paragraph (e) of
this section.
(iii) Blowdown vent stacks. Report the
information specified in paragraph (i) of
this section.
(iv) Condensate storage tanks. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(k) of this section.
(v) Flare stacks. Report the
information specified in paragraph (n)
of this section.
(vi) Centrifugal compressors. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(o) of this section.
(vii) Reciprocating compressors.
Report the information specified in
paragraph (p) of this section.
(viii) Equipment leak surveys. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(q) of this section.
(ix) Equipment leaks by population
count. Report the information specified
in paragraph (r) of this section.
(x) Other large release events. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(y) of this section.
(xi) Crankcase vents. Reporting the
information specified in paragraph (ee)
of this section.
(6) LNG storage. For the equipment/
activities specified in paragraphs
(a)(6)(i) through (ix) of this section,
report the information specified in the
applicable paragraphs of this section.
(i) Acid gas removal units and
nitrogen removal units. Report the
information specified in paragraph (d)
of this section.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
(ii) Blowdown vent stacks. Report the
information specified in paragraph (i) of
this section.
(iii) Flare stacks. Report the
information specified in paragraph (n)
of this section.
(iv) Centrifugal compressors. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(o) of this section.
(v) Reciprocating compressors. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(p) of this section.
(vi) Equipment leak surveys. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(q) of this section.
(vii) Equipment leaks by population
count. Report the information specified
in paragraph (r) of this section.
(viii) Other large release events.
Report the information specified in
paragraph (y) of this section.
(ix) Crankcase vents. Reporting the
information specified in paragraph (ee)
of this section.
(7) LNG import and export equipment.
For the equipment/activities specified
in paragraphs (a)(7)(i) through (ix) of
this section, report the information
specified in the applicable paragraphs of
this section.
(i) Acid gas removal units and
nitrogen removal units. Report the
information specified in paragraph (d)
of this section.
(ii) Blowdown vent stacks. Report the
information specified in paragraph (i) of
this section.
(iii) Flare stacks. Report the
information specified in paragraph (n)
of this section.
(iv) Centrifugal compressors. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(o) of this section.
(v) Reciprocating compressors. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(p) of this section.
(vi) Equipment leak surveys. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(q) of this section.
(vii) Equipment leaks by population
count. Report the information specified
in paragraph (r) of this section.
(viii) Other large release events.
Report the information specified in
paragraph (y) of this section.
(ix) Crankcase vents. Reporting the
information specified in paragraph (ee)
of this section.
(8) Natural gas distribution. For the
equipment/activities specified in
paragraphs (a)(8)(i) through (vii) of this
section, report the information specified
in the applicable paragraphs of this
section.
(i) Natural gas pneumatic devices.
Report the information specified in
paragraph (b) of this section.
(ii) Blowdown vent stacks. Report the
information specified in paragraph (i) of
this section.
PO 00000
Frm 00136
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(iii) Equipment leak surveys. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(q) of this section.
(iv) Equipment leaks by population
count. Report the information specified
in paragraph (r) of this section.
(v) Other large release events. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(y) of this section.
(vi) Combustion equipment. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(z) of this section.
(vii) Crankcase vents. Reporting the
information specified in paragraph (ee)
of this section.
(9) Onshore petroleum and natural
gas gathering and boosting. For the
equipment/activities specified in
paragraphs (a)(9)(i) through (xiv) of this
section, report the information specified
in the applicable paragraphs of this
section.
*
*
*
*
*
(iii) Acid gas removal units and
nitrogen removal units. Report the
information specified in paragraph (d)
of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(vi) Hydrocarbon liquids and
produced water storage tanks. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(j) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(xii) Other large release events. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(y) of this section.
(xiii) Combustion equipment. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(z) of this section.
(xiv) Crankcase vents. Reporting the
information specified in paragraph (ee)
of this section.
(10) Onshore natural gas transmission
pipeline. For the equipment/activities
specified in paragraphs (a)(10)(i)
through (iii) of this section, report the
information specified in the applicable
paragraphs of this section.
(i) Blowdown vent stacks. Report the
information specified in paragraph (i) of
this section.
(ii) Equipment leaks by population
count. Report the information specified
in paragraph (r) of this section.
(iii) Other large release events. Report
the information specified in paragraph
(y) of this section.
(b) Natural gas pneumatic devices.
You must indicate whether the facility
contains the following types of
equipment: Continuous high bleed
natural gas pneumatic devices,
continuous low bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices, and intermittent
bleed natural gas pneumatic devices. If
the facility contains any continuous
high bleed natural gas pneumatic
devices, continuous low bleed natural
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
gas pneumatic devices, or intermittent
bleed natural gas pneumatic devices,
then you must report the information
specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through
(5) of this section, as applicable. You
must report the information specified in
paragraphs (b)(1) through (5) of this
section, as applicable, for each well-pad
(for onshore petroleum and natural gas
production), each gathering and
boosting site (for onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting), or
facility (for all other applicable industry
segments).
(1) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).
(2) The number of natural gas
pneumatic devices as specified in
paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (vii) of this
section, as applicable. If a natural gas
pneumatic device was vented directly to
the atmosphere for part of the year and
routed to a flare, combustion unit, or
vapor recovery system during another
part of the year, then include the device
in each of the applicable counts
specified in paragraphs (b)(2)(ii) through
(vii) of this section.
(i) The total number of natural gas
pneumatic devices of each type
(continuous low bleed, continuous high
bleed, and intermittent bleed),
determined according to § 98.233(a)(4)
through (6).
(ii) The total number of natural gas
pneumatic devices of each type
(continuous low bleed, continuous high
bleed, and intermittent bleed) vented
directly to the atmosphere, determined
according to § 98.233(a)(4) through (6).
(iii) The total number of natural gas
pneumatic devices of each type
(continuous low bleed, continuous high
bleed, and intermittent bleed) routed to
a flare, combustion, or vapor recovery
system.
(iv) The total number of natural gas
pneumatic devices of each type
(continuous low bleed, continuous high
bleed, and intermittent bleed) vented
directly to the atmosphere for which
emissions were calculated using
Calculation Method 1 according to
§ 98.233(a)(1).
(v) The total number of natural gas
pneumatic devices of each type
(continuous low bleed, continuous high
bleed, and intermittent bleed) vented
directly to the atmosphere for which
emissions were calculated using
Calculation Method 2 according to
§ 98.233(a)(2).
(vi) The total number of natural gas
pneumatic devices of each type
(continuous low bleed, continuous high
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
bleed, and intermittent bleed) vented
directly to the atmosphere for which
emissions were calculated using
Calculation Method 3 according to
§ 98.233(a)(3).
(vii) If the reported values in
paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (vi) of this
section are estimated values determined
according to § 98.233(a)(5), then you
must report the information specified in
paragraphs (b)(2)(vii)(A) through (C) of
this section.
(A) The number of natural gas
pneumatic devices of each type reported
in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (vi) of
this section that are counted.
(B) The number of natural gas
pneumatic devices of each type reported
in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (vi) of
this section that are estimated (not
counted).
(C) Whether the calendar year is the
first calendar year of reporting or the
second calendar year of reporting.
(3) For natural gas pneumatic devices
for which emissions were calculated
using Calculation Method 1 according to
§ 98.233(a)(1), report the information in
paragraphs (b)(3)(i) through (vi) of this
section for each measurement location.
(i) Unique measurement location
identification number.
(ii) Type of flow monitor (volumetric
flow monitor; mass flow monitor).
(iii) Number of natural gas pneumatic
devices of each type (continuous low
bleed, continuous high bleed, and
intermittent bleed) downstream of the
flow monitor.
(iv) An indication of whether a
natural gas driven pneumatic pump is
also downstream of the flow monitor.
(v) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, for the natural gas pneumatic
devices calculated according to
§ 98.233(a)(1) for the measurement
location.
(vi) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, for the natural gas pneumatic
devices calculated according to
§ 98.233(a)(1) for the measurement
location.
(4) If you used Calculation Method 2
according to § 98.233(a)(2), report the
information in paragraphs (b)(4)(i)
through (vii) of this section, as
applicable.
(i) The number of years used in the
current measurement cycle.
(ii) For onshore petroleum and natural
gas production and onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities:
(A) Indicate whether the emissions
from the natural gas pneumatic devices
at this well-pad or gathering and
boosting site, as applicable, were
measured during the reporting year or if
PO 00000
Frm 00137
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50417
the emissions were calculated using
Equation W–1B.
(B) If the natural gas pneumatic
devices at this well-pad or gathering and
boosting site, as applicable, were
measured during the reporting year,
indicate the primary measurement
method used (temporary flow meter,
calibrated bagging, or high volume
sampler).
(C) If the emissions from natural gas
pneumatic devices at this well-pad or
gathering and boosting site, as
applicable, were calculated using
Equation W–1B, report the following
information for each type of natural gas
pneumatic device (continuous low
bleed, continuous high bleed, and
intermittent bleed).
(1) The value of the emissions factor
for the reporting year as calculated
using Equation W–1A (in scf/hour/
device).
(2) The total number of natural gas
pneumatic devices measured across all
years upon which the emission factor is
based (i.e., the cumulative value of
‘‘Sy=1n Countt,y’’ in Equation W–1A of
this subpart).
(3) Total number of natural gas
pneumatic devices that vent directly to
the atmosphere and that were not
directly measured according to the
requirements in § 98.233(a)(1) or
(a)(2)(iii) (i.e., ‘‘Countt’’ in Equation W–
1B).
(4) The average estimated number of
hours in the operating year the natural
gas pneumatic devices were in service
(i.e., supplied with natural gas) (‘‘Tt’’ in
Equation W–1B of this subpart).
(iii) For onshore natural gas
processing facilities, onshore natural gas
transmission compression facilities,
underground natural gas storage
facilities, and natural gas distribution
facilities:
(A) Indicate the primary measurement
method used (temporary flow meter,
calibrated bagging, or high volume
sampler) to measure the emissions from
natural gas pneumatic devices at this
facility.
(B) Indicate whether the emissions
from any natural gas pneumatic devices
at this facility were calculated using
Equation W–1B.
(C) If the emissions from any natural
gas pneumatic devices at this facility
were calculated using Equation W–1B,
report the following information for
each type of natural gas pneumatic
device (continuous low bleed,
continuous high bleed, and intermittent
bleed).
(1) The value of the emission factor
for the reporting year as calculated
using Equation W–1A (in scf/hour/
device).
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50418
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
(2) The total number of natural gas
pneumatic devices measured across all
years upon which the emission factor is
based (i.e., the cumulative value of
‘‘Sy=1n Countt,y’’ in Equation W–1A of
this subpart).
(3) Total number of natural gas
pneumatic devices that vent directly to
the atmosphere and that were not
directly measured according to the
requirements in § 98.233(a)(1) or
(a)(2)(iii) (i.e., ‘‘Countt’’ in Equation W–
1B of this subpart).
(4) The average estimated number of
hours in the operating year the natural
gas pneumatic devices were in service
(i.e., supplied with natural gas) (‘‘Tt’’ in
Equation W–1B of this subpart).
(iv) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, cumulative by type of natural
gas pneumatic device for which
emissions were directly measured and
calculated as specified in
§ 98.233(a)(2)(iii) through (viii). Enter 0
if the natural gas pneumatic devices at
this well-pad or gathering and boosting
were not monitored during the reporting
year.
(v) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, cumulative by type of natural
gas pneumatic device for which
emissions were directly measured and
calculated as specified in
§ 98.233(a)(2)(iii) through (viii). Enter 0
if the devices at this well-pad or
gathering and boosting were not
monitored during the reporting year.
(vi) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, cumulative by type of natural
gas pneumatic device for which
emissions were calculated according to
§ 98.233(a)(2)(ix). Enter 0 if all devices
at this well-pad, gathering and boosting
site, or facility were monitored during
the reporting year.
(vii) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, cumulative by type of natural
gas pneumatic device for which
emissions were calculated according to
§ 98.233(a)(2)(ix). Enter 0 if all devices
at this well-pad, gathering and boosting
site, or facility were monitored during
the reporting year.
(5) If you used Calculation Method 3
according to § 98.233(a)(3), report the
information in paragraphs (b)(5)(i)
through (vi) of this section.
(i) For continuous high bleed and
continuous low bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices:
(A) Indicate whether you measured
emissions according to
§ 98.233(a)(3)(i)(A) or used default
emission factors according to
§ 98.233(a)(3)(i)(B) to calculate
emissions from your continuous high
bleed and continuous low bleed natural
gas pneumatic devices vented directly
to the atmosphere at this well-pad,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
gathering and boosting site, or facility,
as applicable.
(B) If measurements were made
according to § 98.233(a)(3)(i)(A),
indicate the primary measurement
method used (temporary flow meter,
calibrated bagging, or high volume
sampler).
(C) If default emission factors were
used according to § 98.233(a)(3)(i)(B) to
calculate emissions, report the following
information for each type of applicable
natural gas pneumatic device
(continuous low bleed and continuous
high bleed).
(1) Total number of natural gas
pneumatic devices that vent directly to
the atmosphere and that were not
directly measured according to the
requirements in § 98.233(a)(1) or
(a)(2)(iii) (‘‘Countt’’ in Equation W–1B of
this subpart).
(2) The average estimated number of
hours in the operating year that the
natural gas pneumatic devices were in
service (i.e., supplied with natural gas)
(‘‘Tt’’ in Equation W–1B of this subpart).
(ii) The number of years used in the
current monitoring cycle for
intermittent bleed pneumatic devices.
(iii) For intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices at onshore petroleum
and natural gas production and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities:
(A) Indicate whether the emissions
from intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices at this well-pad or
gathering and boosting site, as
applicable, were monitored during the
reporting year and calculated using
Equation W–1C of this subpart or if the
emissions were calculated using
Equation W–1D of this subpart.
(B) If the natural gas pneumatic
devices at this well-pad or gathering and
boosting site, as applicable, were
monitored during the reporting year,
indicate the primary monitoring method
used (OGI; Method 21 at 10,000 ppm;
Method 21 at 500 ppm; or infrared laser
beam) and the number of complete
monitoring surveys conducted at the
well-pad or gathering and boosting site.
(C) If the emissions from intermittent
bleed natural gas pneumatic devices at
this well-pad or gathering and boosting
site, as applicable, were calculated
using Equation W–1C of this subpart,
report the following information:
(1) The total number of intermittent
bleed natural gas pneumatic devices
detected as malfunctioning in any
pneumatic device monitoring survey
during the calendar year (‘‘x’’ in
Equation W–1C of this subpart).
(2) Average time the intermittent
bleed natural gas pneumatic devices
were in service (i.e., supplied with
PO 00000
Frm 00138
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
natural gas) and assumed to be
malfunctioning in the calendar year
(average value of ‘‘Tm.z’’ in Equation W–
1C of this subpart).
(3) The total number of intermittent
bleed natural gas pneumatic devices
that were monitored but were not
detected as malfunctioning in any
pneumatic device monitoring survey
during the calendar year (‘‘Count’’ in
Equation W–1C of this subpart).
(4) Average time the intermittent
bleed natural gas pneumatic devices
that were monitored but were not
detected as malfunctioning in any
pneumatic device monitoring survey
during the calendar year were in service
(i.e., supplied with natural gas) during
the calendar year (‘‘Tavg’’ in Equation
W–1C of this subpart).
(D) If the emissions from intermittent
bleed natural gas pneumatic devices at
this well-pad or gathering and boosting
site, as applicable, were calculated
using Equation W–1D of this subpart,
report the following information:
(1) Total number of intermittent bleed
natural gas pneumatic devices that were
not surveyed during the year at the wellpad or gathering and boosting site
(‘‘CountC’’ in Equation W–1D of this
subpart as applied to the well-pad or
gathering and boosting site).
(2) Total number the number of
unique intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices vented directly to
the atmosphere facility-wide that were
monitored during the reporting year and
identified as malfunctioning as
determined according to
§ 98.233(a)(3)(iv)(B) (‘‘CountB’’ in
Equation W–1D of this subpart).
(3) Total number the number of
unique intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices vented directly to
the atmosphere facility-wide that were
monitored during the reporting year as
determined according to
§ 98.233(a)(3)(iv)(A) (‘‘CountA’’ in
Equation W–1D of this subpart).
(4) Average time, in hours, the
intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices that were not
monitored but during the calendar year
were in service (i.e., supplied with
natural gas) during the calendar year
(‘‘Tavg’’ in Equation W–1D of this
subpart).
(iv) For intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices at onshore natural
gas processing facilities, onshore natural
gas transmission compression facilities,
underground natural gas storage
facilities, and natural gas distribution
facilities:
(A) Indicate the primary monitoring
method used (OGI; Method 21 at 10,000
ppm; Method 21 at 500 ppm, or infrared
laser beam) and the number of complete
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
monitoring surveys conducted at the
facility.
(B) The total number of intermittent
bleed natural gas pneumatic devices
detected as malfunctioning in any
pneumatic device monitoring survey
during the calendar year (‘‘x’’ in
Equation W–1C of this subpart).
(C) Average time the intermittent
bleed natural gas pneumatic devices
were in service (i.e., supplied with
natural gas) and assumed to be
malfunctioning in the calendar year
(average value of ‘‘Tm,z’’ in Equation W–
1C of this subpart).
(D) The total number of intermittent
bleed natural gas pneumatic devices
that were monitored but were not
detected as malfunctioning in any
pneumatic device monitoring survey
during the calendar year (‘‘Count’’ in
Equation W–1C of this subpart).
(E) Average time the intermittent
bleed natural gas pneumatic devices
that were monitored but were not
detected as malfunctioning in any
pneumatic device monitoring survey
during the calendar year were in service
(i.e., supplied with natural gas) during
the calendar year (‘‘Tavg’’ in Equation
W–1C of this subpart).
(F) If the emissions from some of the
intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices at this facility were
calculated using Equation W–1D of this
subpart, report the following
information:
(1) Total number of intermittent bleed
natural gas pneumatic devices that were
not surveyed during the year at the
facility (‘‘CountC’’ in Equation W–1D of
this subpart).
(2) Total number of unique
intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices vented directly to
the atmosphere facility-wide that were
monitored during the reporting year and
identified as malfunctioning as
determined according to
§ 98.233(a)(3)(iv)(B) (‘‘CountB’’ in
Equation W–1D of this subpart).
(3) Total number the number of
unique intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices vented directly to
the atmosphere facility-wide that were
monitored during the reporting year as
determined according to
§ 98.233(a)(3)(iv)(A) (‘‘CountA’’ in
Equation W–1D of this subpart).
(4) Average time, in hours, the
intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices that were not
monitored but during the calendar year
were in service (i.e., supplied with
natural gas) during the calendar year
(‘‘Tavg’’ in Equation W–1D of this
subpart).
(v) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, for each type of natural gas
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
pneumatic device calculated according
to Calculation Method 3 in
§ 98.233(a)(3).
(vi) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, for each type of natural gas
pneumatic device calculated according
to Calculation Method 3 in
§ 98.233(a)(3).
(c) Natural gas driven pneumatic
pumps. You must indicate whether the
facility has any natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps. If the facility
contains any natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps, then you must report
the information specified in paragraphs
(c)(1) through (7) of this section. If a
pump was vented directly to the
atmosphere for part of the year and
routed to a flare, combustion, or vapor
recovery system during another part of
the year, then include the pump in each
of the counts specified in paragraphs
(c)(2) through (4) of this section. You
must report the information specified in
paragraphs (c)(1) through (7) of this
section, as applicable, for each well-pad
(for onshore petroleum and natural gas
production) and each gathering and
boosting site (for onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting).
(1) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).
(2) The number of natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps as specified in
paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (vi) of this
section, as applicable. If a natural gas
driven pneumatic pump was vented
directly to the atmosphere for part of the
year and routed to a flare, combustion
unit, or vapor recovery system during
another part of the year, then include
the device in each of the applicable
counts specified in paragraphs (c)(2)(ii)
through (vi) of this section.
(i) Count of natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps.
(ii) Count of natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps vented directly to the
atmosphere at any point during the year.
(iii) Count of natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps routed to a flare,
combustion, or vapor recovery system at
any point during the year.
(iv) Count of natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps vented directly to the
atmosphere for which emissions were
calculated using Calculation Method 1
according to § 98.233(c)(1).
(v) Count of natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps vented directly to the
atmosphere for which emissions were
calculated using Calculation Method 2
according to § 98.233(c)(2).
(vi) Count of natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps vented directly to the
PO 00000
Frm 00139
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50419
atmosphere for which emissions were
calculated using Calculation Method 3
according to § 98.233(c)(3).
(3) For natural gas driven pneumatic
pumps for which emissions were
calculated using Calculation Method 1
according to § 98.233(c)(1), report the
information in paragraphs (c)(3)(i)
through (vi) of this section for each
measurement location.
(i) Unique measurement location
identification number.
(ii) Type of flow monitor (volumetric
flow monitor; mass flow monitor).
(iii) Number of natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps downstream of the
flow monitor.
(iv) An indication of whether any
natural gas pneumatic devices are also
downstream of the monitoring location.
(v) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, for the pneumatic pump(s)
calculated according to § 98.233(c)(1) for
the measurement location.
(vi) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, for the pneumatic pump(s)
calculated according to § 98.233(c)(1) for
the measurement location.
(4) If you used Calculation Method 2
according to § 98.233(c)(2), report the
information in paragraphs (c)(4)(i)
through (vi) of this section, as
applicable.
(i) The number of years used in the
current measurement cycle.
(ii) Indicate whether the emissions
from the pneumatic pumps at this wellpad or gathering and boosting site, as
applicable, were measured during the
reporting year or if the emissions were
calculated using Equation W–2C.
(A) If the pneumatic pumps at this
well-pad or gathering and boosting site,
as applicable, were measured during the
reporting year, indicate the primary
measurement method used (temporary
flow meter, calibrated bagging, or high
volume sampler).
(B) If the emissions from pneumatic
pumps at this well-pad or gathering and
boosting site, as applicable, were
calculated using Equation W–2C, report
the following information:
(1) The value of the emissions factor
for the reporting year as calculated
using Equation W–2B (in scf/hour/
pump).
(2) The total number of pumps
measured across all years upon which
the emission factor is based (i.e., the
cumulative value of ‘‘Sny=1 County’’ term
used in Equation W–2B).
(3) Total number of natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps that vent directly to
the atmosphere and that were not
directly measured according to the
requirements in § 98.233(c)(1) or
(c)(2)(iii) (i.e., ‘‘Count’’ in Equation W–
2B).
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50420
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
(4) The average estimated number of
hours in the operating year the pumps
were pumping liquid (i.e., ‘‘T’’ in
Equation W–2C).
(iii) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, cumulative for all natural gas
driven pneumatic pumps for which
emissions were directly measured and
calculated as specified in
§ 98.233(c)(2)(ii) through (vi). Enter 0 if
emissions from none of the natural gas
driven pneumatic pumps at this wellpad or gathering and boosting site were
measured during the reporting year.
(iv) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, cumulative for all natural gas
driven pneumatic pumps for which
emissions were directly measured and
calculated as specified in
§ 98.233(c)(2)(ii) through (vi). Enter 0 if
emissions from none of the natural gas
driven pneumatic pumps at this wellpad or gathering and boosting site were
measured during the reporting year.
(v) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, cumulative for all natural gas
driven pneumatic pumps for which
emissions were calculated according to
§ 98.233(c)(2)(vii)(B) through (D). Enter
0 if emissions from all natural gas
driven pneumatic pumps at this wellpad or gathering and boosting site were
measured during the reporting year.
(vi) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, cumulative for all natural gas
driven pneumatic pumps for which
emissions were calculated according to
§ 98.233(c)(2)(vii)(B) through (D). Enter
0 if emissions from all natural gas
driven pneumatic pumps at this wellpad or gathering and boosting site were
measured during the reporting year.
(5) If you used Calculation Method 3
according to § 98.233(c)(3), report the
information in paragraphs (c)(5)(i)
through (iii) of this section for the
natural gas driven pneumatic pumps
subject to Calculation Method 3.
(i) Average estimated number of hours
in the calendar year that natural gas
driven pneumatic pumps that vented
directly to atmosphere were pumping
liquid (‘‘T’’ in Equation W–2C of this
subpart).
(ii) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, for all natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps vented directly to the
atmosphere combined, calculated
according to § 98.233(c)(3).
(iii) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, for all natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps vented directly to the
atmosphere combined, calculated
according to § 98.233(c)(3).
(d) Acid gas removal units and
nitrogen removal units. You must
indicate whether your facility has any
acid gas removal units or nitrogen
removal units that vent directly to the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
atmosphere, to a flare or engine, or to a
sulfur recovery plant. For any acid gas
removal units or nitrogen removal units
that vent directly to the atmosphere or
to a sulfur recovery plant, you must
report the information specified in
paragraphs (d)(1) and (2) of this section.
For acid gas removal units or nitrogen
removal units that were routed to a flare
or routed to an engine for the entire
year, you must only report the
information specified in paragraph
(d)(1)(i) through (iv) and (x) of this
section.
(1) You must report the information
specified in paragraphs (d)(1)(i) through
(x) of this section for each acid gas
removal unit or nitrogen removal unit,
as applicable.
(i) A unique name or ID number for
the acid gas removal unit or nitrogen
removal unit. For the onshore petroleum
and natural gas production and the
onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting industry
segments, a different name or ID may be
used for a single acid gas removal unit
or nitrogen removal unit for each
location it operates at in a given year.
(ii) Whether the acid gas removal unit
or nitrogen removal unit vent was
routed to a flare, and if so, whether it
was routed for the entire year or only
part of the year.
(iii) Whether the acid gas removal
unit or nitrogen removal unit vent was
routed to combustion, and if so, whether
it was routed for the entire year or only
part of the year.
(iv) Total feed rate entering the acid
gas removal unit or nitrogen removal
unit, using a meter or engineering
estimate based on process knowledge or
best available data, in million standard
cubic feet per year.
(v) If the acid gas removal unit or
nitrogen removal unit was routed to a
flare or to combustion for only part of
the year, the feed rate entering the acid
gas removal unit or nitrogen removal
unit during the portion of the year that
the emissions were vented directly to
the atmosphere, using a meter or
engineering estimate based on process
knowledge or best available data, in
million standard cubic feet per year.
(vi) The calculation method used to
calculate CO2 and CH4 emissions from
the acid gas removal unit or to calculate
CH4 emissions from the nitrogen
removal unit, as specified in § 98.233(d).
(vii) Whether any CO2 emissions from
the acid gas removal unit are recovered
and transferred outside the facility, as
specified in § 98.233(d)(11). If any CO2
emissions from the acid gas removal
unit were recovered and transferred
outside the facility, then you must
report the annual quantity of CO2, in
PO 00000
Frm 00140
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
metric tons CO2, that was recovered and
transferred outside the facility under
subpart PP of this part.
(viii) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, vented directly to the
atmosphere from the acid gas removal
unit, calculated using any one of the
calculation methods specified in
§ 98.233(d) and as specified in
§ 98.233(d)(10) and (11).
(ix) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, vented directly to the
atmosphere from the acid gas removal
unit or nitrogen removal unit, calculated
using any one of the calculation
methods specified in § 98.233(d) and as
specified in § 98.233(d)(10) and (11).
(x) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).
(2) You must report information
specified in paragraphs (d)(2)(i) through
(iii) of this section, applicable to the
calculation method reported in
paragraph (d)(1)(iii) of this section, for
each acid gas removal unit or nitrogen
removal unit.
(i) If you used Calculation Method 1
or Calculation Method 2 as specified in
§ 98.233(d) to calculate CO2 emissions
from the acid gas removal unit and
Calculation Method 2 as specified in
§ 98.233(d) to calculate CH4 emissions
from the acid gas removal unit or
nitrogen removal unit, then you must
report the information specified in
paragraphs (d)(2)(i)(A) through (C) of
this section, as applicable.
(A) Annual average volumetric
fraction of CO2 in the vent gas exiting
the acid gas removal unit.
(B) Annual average volumetric
fraction of CH4 in the vent gas exiting
the acid gas removal unit or nitrogen
removal unit.
(C) Annual volume of gas vented from
the acid gas removal unit or nitrogen
removal unit, in cubic feet.
(D) The temperature that corresponds
to the reported annual volume of gas
vented from the unit, in degrees
Fahrenheit. If the annual volume of gas
vented is reported in actual cubic feet,
report the actual temperature; if it is
reported in standard cubic feet, report
60 °F.
(E) The pressure that corresponds to
the reported annual volume of gas
vented from the unit, in pounds per
square inch absolute. If the annual
volume of gas vented is reported in
actual cubic feet, report the actual
pressure; if it is reported in standard
cubic feet, report 14.7 psia.
(ii) If you used Calculation Method 3
as specified in § 98.233(d) to calculate
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
CO2 or CH4 emissions from the acid gas
removal unit or nitrogen removal unit,
then you must report the information
specified in paragraphs (d)(2)(ii)(A)
through (M) of this section, as
applicable depending on the equation
used.
(A) Indicate which equation was used
(Equation W–4A, W–4B, or W–4C).
(B) Annual average volumetric
fraction of CO2 in the natural gas
flowing out of the acid gas removal unit,
as specified in Equation W–4A,
Equation W–4B, or Equation W–4C of
this subpart.
(C) Annual average volumetric
fraction of CO2 content in natural gas
flowing into the acid gas removal unit,
as specified in Equation W–4A,
Equation W–4B, or Equation W–4C of
this subpart.
(D) Annual average volumetric
fraction of CO2 in the vent gas exiting
the acid gas removal unit, as specified
in Equation W–4A or Equation W–4B of
this subpart.
(E) Annual average volumetric
fraction of CH4 in the natural gas
flowing out of the acid gas removal unit
or nitrogen removal unit, as specified in
Equation W–4A, Equation W–4B, or
Equation W–4C of this subpart.
(F) Annual average volumetric
fraction of CH4 content in natural gas
flowing into the acid gas removal unit
or nitrogen removal unit, as specified in
Equation W–4A, Equation W–4B, or
Equation W–4C of this subpart.
(G) Annual average volumetric
fraction of CH4 in the vent gas exiting
the acid gas removal unit or nitrogen
removal unit, as specified in Equation
W–4A or Equation W–4B of this
subpart.
(H) The total annual volume of
natural gas flow into the acid gas
removal unit or nitrogen removal unit,
as specified in Equation W–4A or
Equation W–4C of this subpart, in cubic
feet at actual conditions.
(I) The temperature that corresponds
to the reported total annual volume of
natural gas flow into the acid gas
removal unit or nitrogen removal unit,
as specified in Equation W–4A or
Equation W–4C of this subpart, in
degrees Fahrenheit. If the total annual
volume of natural gas flow is reported
in actual cubic feet, report the actual
temperature; if it is reported in standard
cubic feet, report 60 °F.
(J) The pressure that corresponds to
the reported total annual volume of
natural gas flow into the acid gas
removal unit or nitrogen removal unit,
as specified in Equation W–4A or
Equation W–4C of this subpart, in
pounds per square inch absolute. If the
total annual volume of natural gas flow
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
is reported in actual cubic feet, report
the actual pressure; if it is reported in
standard cubic feet, report 14.7 psia.
(K) The total annual volume of natural
gas flow out of the acid gas removal unit
or nitrogen removal unit, as specified in
Equation W–4B or Equation W–4C of
this subpart, in cubic feet at actual
conditions.
(L) The temperature that corresponds
to the reported total annual volume of
natural gas flow out of the acid gas
removal unit or nitrogen removal unit,
as specified in Equation W–4B or
Equation W–4C of this subpart, in
degrees Fahrenheit. If the total annual
volume of natural gas flow is reported
in actual cubic feet, report the actual
temperature; if it is reported in standard
cubic feet, report 60 °F.
(M) The pressure that corresponds to
the reported total annual volume of
natural gas flow out of the acid gas
removal unit or nitrogen removal unit,
as specified in Equation W–4B or
Equation W–4C of this subpart, in
pounds per square inch absolute. If the
total annual volume of natural gas flow
is reported in actual cubic feet, report
the actual pressure; if it is reported in
standard cubic feet, report 14.7 psia.
(iii) If you used Calculation Method 4
as specified in § 98.233(d) to calculate
CO2 or CH4 emissions from the acid gas
removal unit or nitrogen removal unit,
then you must report the information
specified in paragraphs (d)(2)(iii)(A)
through (N) of this section, as applicable
to the simulation software package used.
(A) The name of the simulation
software package used.
(B) Annual average natural gas feed
temperature, in degrees Fahrenheit.
(C) Annual average natural gas feed
pressure, in pounds per square inch.
(D) Annual average natural gas feed
flow rate, in standard cubic feet per
minute.
(E) Annual average acid gas content of
the feed natural gas, in mole percent.
(F) Annual average acid gas content of
the outlet natural gas, in mole percent.
(G) Annual average methane content
of the feed natural gas, in mole percent.
(H) Annual average methane content
of the outlet natural gas, in mole
percent.
(I) Total annual unit operating hours,
excluding downtime for maintenance or
standby, in hours per year.
(J) Annual average exit temperature of
the natural gas, in degrees Fahrenheit.
(K) Annual average solvent pressure,
in pounds per square inch.
(L) Annual average solvent
temperature, in degrees Fahrenheit.
(M) Annual average solvent
circulation rate, in gallons per minute.
(N) Solvent type used for the majority
of the year, from one of the following
PO 00000
Frm 00141
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50421
options: SelexolTM, Rectisol®, PurisolTM,
Fluor Solvent, BenfieldTM, 20 wt%
MEA, 30 wt% MEA, 40 wt% MDEA, 50
wt% MDEA, and other (specify).
(e) Dehydrators. You must indicate
whether your facility contains any of the
following equipment: Glycol
dehydrators for which you calculated
emissions using Calculation Method 1
according to § 98.233(e)(1), glycol
dehydrators for which you calculated
emissions using Calculation Method 2
according to § 98.233(e)(2), and
dehydrators that use desiccant. If your
facility contains any of the equipment
listed in this paragraph (e), then you
must report the applicable information
in paragraphs (e)(1) through (3) of this
section.
(1) For each glycol dehydrator for
which you calculated emissions using
Calculation Method 1 (as specified in
§ 98.233(e)(1)), you must report the
information specified in paragraphs
(e)(1)(i) through (xviii) of this section for
the dehydrator.
(i) A unique name or ID number for
the dehydrator. For the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
and the onshore petroleum and natural
gas gathering and boosting industry
segments, a different name or ID may be
used for a single dehydrator for each
location it operates at in a given year.
(ii) Annual average dehydrator feed
natural gas flow rate, in million
standard cubic feet per day.
(iii) Annual average dehydrator feed
natural gas water content, in pounds per
million standard cubic feet.
(iv) Annual average dehydrator outlet
natural gas water content, in pounds per
million standard cubic feet.
(v) Dehydrator absorbent circulation
pump type (e.g., natural gas pneumatic,
air pneumatic, or electric).
(vi) Annual average dehydrator
absorbent circulation rate, in gallons per
minute.
(vii) Type of absorbent (e.g.,
triethylene glycol (TEG), diethylene
glycol (DEG), or ethylene glycol (EG)).
(viii) Whether stripping gas is used in
dehydrator.
(ix) Whether a flash tank separator is
used in dehydrator.
(x) Total time the dehydrator is
operating during the year, in hours.
(xi) Annual average temperature of
the wet natural gas at the absorber inlet,
in degrees Fahrenheit.
(xii) Annual average pressure of the
wet natural gas at the absorber inlet, in
pounds per square inch gauge.
(xiii) Annual average mole fraction of
CH4 in wet natural gas.
(xiv) Annual average mole fraction of
CO2 in wet natural gas.
(xv) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50422
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).(xvi) If
a flash tank separator is used in the
dehydrator, then you must report the
information specified in paragraphs
(e)(1)(xvi)(A) through (F) of this section
for the emissions from the flash tank
vent, as applicable. If flash tank
emissions were routed to a regenerator
firebox/fire tubes, then you must also
report the information specified in
paragraphs (e)(1)(xvi)(G) through (I) of
this section for the combusted emissions
from the flash tank vent.
(A) Whether any flash gas emissions
are vented directly to the atmosphere,
routed to a flare, routed to the
regenerator firebox/fire tubes, routed to
a vapor recovery system, used as
stripping gas, or any combination.
(B) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, from the flash tank when not
routed to a flare or regenerator firebox/
fire tubes, calculated according to
§ 98.233(e)(1) and, if applicable, (e)(4).
(C) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, from the flash tank when not
routed to a flare or regenerator firebox/
fire tubes, calculated according to
§ 98.233(e)(1) and, if applicable, (e)(4).
(D) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, that resulted from routing
flash gas to a regenerator firebox/fire
tubes, calculated according to
§ 98.233(e)(5).
(E) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, that resulted from routing
flash gas to a regenerator firebox/fire
tubes, calculated according to
§ 98.233(e)(5).
(F) Annual N2O emissions, in metric
tons N2O, that resulted from routing
flash gas to a regenerator firebox/fire
tubes, calculated according to
§ 98.233(e)(5).
(G) Indicate whether the regenerator
firebox/fire tubes was monitored with a
CEMS. If a CEMS was used, then
paragraphs (e)(1)(xvi)(E) and (F) and
(e)(1)(xvi)(H) and (I) of this section do
not apply.
(H) Total volume of gas from the flash
tank to a regenerator firebox/fire tubes,
in standard cubic feet.
(I) Average combustion efficiency,
expressed as a fraction of gas from the
flash tank combusted by a burning
regenerator firebox/fire tubes.
(xvii) Report the information specified
in paragraphs (e)(1)(xvii)(A) through (F)
of this section for the emissions from
the still vent, as applicable. If still vent
emissions were routed to a regenerator
firebox/fire tubes, then you must also
report the information specified in
paragraphs (e)(1)(xvii)(G) through (I) of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
this section for the combusted emissions
from the still vent.
(A) Whether any still vent emissions
are vented directly to the atmosphere,
routed to a flare, routed to the
regenerator firebox/fire tubes, routed to
a vapor recovery system, used as
stripping gas, or any combination.
(B) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, from the still vent when not
routed to a flare or regenerator firebox/
fire tubes, calculated according to
§ 98.233(e)(1), and, if applicable, (e)(4).
(C) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, from the still vent when not
routed to a flare or regenerator firebox/
fire tubes, calculated according to
§ 98.233(e)(1) and, if applicable, (e)(4).
(D) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, that resulted from routing still
vent gas to a regenerator firebox/fire
tubes, calculated according to
§ 98.233(e)(5).
(E) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, that resulted from routing still
vent gas to a regenerator firebox/fire
tubes, calculated according to
§ 98.233(e)(5).
(F) Annual N2O emissions, in metric
tons N2O, that resulted from routing still
vent gas to a regenerator firebox/fire
tubes, calculated according to
§ 98.233(e)(5).
(G) Indicate whether the regenerator
firebox/fire tubes was monitored with a
CEMS. If a CEMS was used, then
paragraphs (e)(1)(xvii)(E) and (F) and
(e)(1)(xvii)(H) and (I) of this section do
not apply.
(H) Total volume of gas from the still
vent to a regenerator firebox/fire tubes,
in standard cubic feet.
(I) Average combustion efficiency,
expressed as a fraction of gas from the
still vent combusted by a burning
regenerator firebox/fire tubes.
(xviii) Name of the software package
used.
(2) You must report the information
specified in paragraphs (e)(2)(i) through
(vi) of this section for all glycol
dehydrators with an annual average
daily natural gas throughput greater
than 0 million standard cubic feet per
day and less than 0.4 million standard
cubic feet per day for which you
calculated emissions using Calculation
Method 2 (as specified in § 98.233(e)(2))
at the facility, well-pad, or gathering
and boosting site.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).
(ii) The total number of dehydrators at
the facility, well-pad, or gathering and
PO 00000
Frm 00142
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
boosting site for which you calculated
emissions using Calculation Method 2.
(iii) Whether any dehydrator
emissions were routed to a vapor
recovery system. If any dehydrator
emissions were routed to a vapor
recovery system, then you must report
the total number of dehydrators at the
facility that routed to a vapor recovery
system.
(iv) Whether any dehydrator
emissions were routed to a control
device that reduces CO2 and/or CH4
emissions other than a vapor recovery
system or a flare or regenerator firebox/
fire tubes. If any dehydrator emissions
were routed to a control device that
reduces CO2 and/or CH4 emissions other
than a vapor recovery system or a flare
or regenerator firebox/fire tubes, then
you must specify the type of control
device(s) and the total number of
dehydrators at the facility that were
routed to each type of control device.
(v) Whether any dehydrator emissions
were routed to a flare or regenerator
firebox/fire tubes. If any dehydrator
emissions were routed to a flare or
regenerator firebox/fire tubes, then you
must report the information specified in
paragraphs (e)(2)(v)(A) through (E) of
this section.
(A) The total number of dehydrators
routed to a flare and the total number
of dehydrators routed to regenerator
firebox/fire tubes.
(B) Total volume of gas from the flash
tank to a regenerator firebox/fire tubes,
in standard cubic feet.
(C) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, for the dehydrators routed to
a regenerator firebox/fire tubes reported
in paragraph (e)(2)(v)(A) of this section,
calculated according to § 98.233(e)(5).
(D) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, for the dehydrators routed to
a regenerator firebox/fire tubes reported
in paragraph (e)(2)(v)(A) of this section,
calculated according to § 98.233(e)(5).
(E) Annual N2O emissions, in metric
tons N2O, for the dehydrators routed to
a regenerator firebox/fire tubes reported
in paragraph (e)(2)(v)(A) of this section,
calculated according to § 98.233(e)(5).
(vi) For dehydrator emissions that
were not routed to a flare or regenerator
firebox/fire tubes, report the information
specified in paragraphs (e)(2)(vi)(A) and
(B) of this section.
(A) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, for emissions from all
dehydrators reported in paragraph
(e)(2)(ii) of this section that were not
routed to a flare or regenerator firebox/
fire tubes, calculated according to
§ 98.233(e)(2) and, if applicable, (e)(4),
where emissions are added together for
all such dehydrators.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
(B) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, for emissions from all
dehydrators reported in paragraph
(e)(2)(ii) of this section that were not
routed to a flare or regenerator firebox/
fire tubes, calculated according to
§ 98.233(e)(2) and, if applicable, (e)(4),
where emissions are added together for
all such dehydrators.
(3) For dehydrators that use desiccant
(as specified in § 98.233(e)(3)), you must
report the information specified in
paragraphs (e)(3)(i) through (vi) of this
section for the entire facility.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).
(ii) Count of desiccant dehydrators
that had one or more openings during
the calendar year at the facility, wellpad, or gathering and boosting site for
which you calculated emissions using
Calculation Method 3 as specified in
paragraphs (e)(3)(ii)(A) through (C) of
this section.
(A) The total number of opened
desiccant dehydrators.
(B) The number of opened desiccant
dehydrators that used deliquescing
desiccant (e.g., calcium chloride or
lithium chloride).
(C) The number of opened desiccant
dehydrators that used regenerative
desiccant (e.g., molecular sieves,
activated alumina, or silica gel).
(iii) For desiccant dehydrators at the
facility, well-pad, or gathering and
boosting site identified in paragraph
(e)(3)(ii)(A) of this section, total physical
volume of all opened dehydrator
vessels.
(iv) For desiccant dehydrators at the
facility, well-pad, or gathering and
boosting site identified in paragraph
(e)(3)(ii)(A) of this section, total number
of dehydrator openings in the calendar
year.
(v) For desiccant dehydrators at the
facility, well-pad, or gathering and
boosting site identified in paragraph
(e)(3)(ii)(A) of this section, whether any
dehydrator emissions were routed to a
vapor recovery system. If any
dehydrator emissions were routed to a
vapor recovery system, then you must
report the total number of dehydrators
at the facility that routed to a vapor
recovery system.
(vi) For desiccant dehydrators at the
facility, well-pad, or gathering and
boosting site identified in paragraph
(e)(3)(ii)(A) of this section, whether any
dehydrator emissions were routed to a
control device that reduces CO2 and/or
CH4 emissions other than a vapor
recovery system or a flare or regenerator
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
firebox/fire tubes. If any dehydrator
emissions were routed to a control
device that reduces CO2 and/or CH4
emissions other than a vapor recovery
system or a flare or regenerator firebox/
fire tubes, then you must specify the
type of control device(s) and the total
number of dehydrators at the facility
that were routed to each type of control
device.
(vii) For desiccant dehydrators at the
facility, well-pad, or gathering and
boosting site identified in paragraph
(e)(3)(ii)(A) of this section, whether any
dehydrator emissions were routed to a
flare or regenerator firebox/fire tubes. If
any dehydrator emissions were routed
to a flare or regenerator firebox/fire
tubes, then you must report the
information specified in paragraphs
(e)(3)(vii)(A) through (E) of this section.
(A) The total number of dehydrators
routed to a flare and the total number
of dehydrators routed to regenerator
firebox/fire tubes.
(B) Total volume of gas from the flash
tank to a regenerator firebox/fire tubes,
in standard cubic feet.
(C) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, for the dehydrators routed to
a regenerator firebox/fire tubes reported
in paragraph (e)(3)(vii)(A) of this
section, calculated according to
§ 98.233(e)(5).
(D) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, for the dehydrators routed to
a regenerator firebox/fire tubes reported
in paragraph (e)(3)(vii)(A) of this
section, calculated according to
§ 98.233(e)(5).
(E) Annual N2O emissions, in metric
tons N2O, for the dehydrators routed to
a regenerator firebox/fire tubes reported
in paragraph (e)(3)(vii)(A) of this
section, calculated according to
§ 98.233(e)(5).
(viii) For desiccant dehydrators at the
facility, well-pad, or gathering and
boosting site identified in paragraph
(e)(3)(ii)(A) of this section that were not
routed to a flare or regenerator firebox/
fire tubes, report the information
specified in paragraphs (e)(3)(viii)(A)
and (B) of this section.
(A) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, for emissions from all
desiccant dehydrators reported under
paragraph (e)(3)(ii) of this section that
are not venting to a flare or regenerator
firebox/fire tubes, calculated according
to § 98.233(e)(3) and, if applicable,
(e)(4), and summing for all such
dehydrators.
(B) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, for emissions from all
desiccant dehydrators reported in
paragraph (e)(3)(ii) of this section that
are not venting to a flare or regenerator
firebox/fire tubes, calculated according
PO 00000
Frm 00143
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50423
to § 98.233(e)(3), and, if applicable,
(e)(4), and summing for all such
dehydrators.
(f) * * *
(1) For each well for which you used
Calculation Method 1 to calculate
natural gas emissions from well venting
for liquids unloading, report the
information specified in paragraphs
(f)(1)(i) through (xii) of this section.
Report information separately for wells
by unloading type combination (with or
without plunger lifts, automated or
manual unloading).
(i) Well ID number.
(ii) Well tubing diameter and pressure
group ID.
(iii) Unloading type combination
(with or without plunger lifts,
automated or manual unloading).
(iv) [Reserved]
(v) Indicate whether the monitoring
period used to determine the
cumulative amount of time venting was
not the full calendar year.
(vi) Cumulative amount of time the
well was vented (‘‘Tp’’ from Equation
W–7A or W–7B of this subpart), in
hours.
(vii) Cumulative number of
unloadings vented directly to the
atmosphere for the well.
*
*
*
*
*
(xi) For each well tubing diameter
group and pressure group combination,
you must report the information
specified in paragraphs (f)(1)(xi)(A)
through (F) of this section for each
individual well not using a plunger lift
that was tested during the year.
*
*
*
*
*
(F) Unloading type (automated or
manual).
(xii) For each well tubing diameter
group and pressure group combination,
you must report the information
specified in paragraphs (f)(1)(xii)(A)
through (F) of this section for each
individual well using a plunger lift that
was tested during the year.
*
*
*
*
*
(F) Unloading type (automated or
manual).
(2) For each well for which you used
Calculation Method 2 or 3 (as specified
in § 93.233(f)) to calculate natural gas
emissions from well venting for liquids
unloading, you must report the
information in paragraphs (f)(2)(i)
through (xii) of this section. Report
information separately for each
calculation method and unloading type
combination (with or without plunger
lifts, automated or manual unloadings).
(i) Well ID number.
*
*
*
*
*
(iii) Unloading type combination
(with or without plunger lifts,
automated or manual unloadings).
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50424
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
(iv) [Reserved]
(v) Cumulative number of unloadings
vented directly to the atmosphere for
the well.
*
*
*
*
*
(ix) Average flow-line rate of gas
(average of ‘‘SFRp’’ from Equation W–8
or W–9 of this subpart, as applicable),
at standard conditions in cubic feet per
hour.
(x) Cumulative amount of time that
wells were left open to the atmosphere
during unloading events (sum of
‘‘HRp,q’’ from Equation W–8 or W–9 of
this subpart, as applicable), in hours.
(xi) For each well without plunger
lifts, the information in paragraphs
(f)(2)(xi)(A) through (D) of this section.
(A) Internal casing diameter (‘‘CDp’’
from Equation W–8 of this subpart), in
inches.
(B) Well depth (‘‘WDp’’ from Equation
W–8 of this subpart), in feet.
(C) Shut-in pressure, surface pressure,
or casing pressure (‘‘SPp’’ from Equation
W–8 of this subpart), in pounds per
square inch absolute.
(D) The most recent calendar year
Calculation Method 1 was used to
calculate emissions from well venting
for liquids unloading for wells without
plunger lifts of the same sub-basin, well
tubing diameter group and pressure
group combination.
(xii) For wells with plunger lifts, the
information in paragraphs (f)(2)(xiii)(A)
through (D) of this section.
(A) Internal tubing diameter (‘‘TDp’’
from Equation W–9 of this subpart), in
inches.
(B) Tubing depth (‘‘WDp’’ from
Equation W–9 of this subpart), in feet.
(C) Flow line pressure (‘‘SPp’’ from
Equation W–9 of this subpart), in
pounds per square inch absolute.
(D) The most recent calendar year
Calculation Method 1 was used to
calculate emissions from well venting
for liquids unloading for the wells with
plunger lifts in the same sub-basin, well
tubing diameter group and pressure
group combination.
(g) Completions and workovers with
hydraulic fracturing. You must indicate
whether your facility had any well
completions or workovers with
hydraulic fracturing during the calendar
year. If your facility had well
completions or workovers with
hydraulic fracturing during the calendar
year that vented directly to the
atmosphere, then you must report
information specified in paragraphs
(g)(1) through (10) of this section, for
each well. If your facility had well
completions or workovers with
hydraulic fracturing during the year that
only routed to flares, then you must
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
report the information specified in
paragraphs (g)(1) through (3) of this
section, for each well. Report
information separately for completions
and workovers.
(1) Well ID number.
(2) Well type combination (horizontal
or vertical, flared or vented, reduced
emission completion or not a reduced
emission completion, gas well or oil
well).
(3) Number of completions or
workovers for each well.
*
*
*
*
*
(5) * * *
(i) Cumulative gas flowback time, in
hours, for all completions or workovers
at the well from when gas is first
detected until sufficient quantities are
present to enable separation, and the
cumulative flowback time, in hours,
after sufficient quantities of gas are
present to enable separation (sum of
‘‘Tp,i’’ and sum of ‘‘Tp,s’’ values used in
Equation W–10A of § 98.233). You may
delay the reporting of this data element
if you indicate in the annual report that
the well is a wildcat well and/or
delineation well and the only wells in
the same sub-basin and well type
combination are wildcat wells and/or
delineation wells. If you elect to delay
reporting of this data element, you must
report by the date specified in paragraph
(cc) of this section the total number of
hours of flowback from the well during
completions or workovers.
(ii) If the well is a measured well for
the sub-basin and well-type
combination, the flowback rate, in
standard cubic feet per hour (average of
‘‘FRs,p’’ values used in Equation W–12A
of § 98.233). You may delay the
reporting of this data element if you
indicate in the annual report that the
well is a wildcat well and/or delineation
well and the only wells that can be used
for the measurement in the same subbasin and well type combination are
wildcat wells and/or delineation wells.
If you elect to delay reporting of this
data element, you must report by the
date specified in paragraph (cc) of this
section the measured flowback rate(s)
during well completion or workover for
the well.
(iii) If you used Equation W–12C of
§ 98.233 to calculate the average gas
production rate for an oil well, then you
must report the information specified in
paragraphs (g)(6)(iii)(A) and (B) of this
section.
(A) Gas to oil ratio for the well in
standard cubic feet of gas per barrel of
oil (‘‘GORp’’ in Equation W–12C of
§ 98.233). You may delay the reporting
of this data element if you indicate in
the annual report that the well is a
PO 00000
Frm 00144
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
wildcat well and/or delineation well
and the only wells that can be used for
the measurement in the same sub-basin
and well type combination are wildcat
wells and/or delineation wells. If you
elect to delay reporting of this data
element, you must report by the date
specified in paragraph (cc) of this
section the gas to oil ratio for the well.
(B) Volume of oil produced during the
first 30 days of production after
completion of the newly drilled well or
well workover using hydraulic
fracturing, in barrels (‘‘Vp’’ in Equation
W–12C of § 98.233). You may delay the
reporting of this data element if you
indicate in the annual report that the
well is a wildcat well and/or delineation
well and the only wells that can be used
for the measurement in the same subbasin and well type combination are
wildcat wells and/or delineation wells.
If you elect to delay reporting of this
data element, you must report by the
date specified in paragraph (cc) of this
section the volume of oil produced
during the first 30 days of production
after well completion or workover for
the well.
(6) If you used Equation W–10B of
§ 98.233 to calculate annual volumetric
total gas emissions, then you must
report the information specified in
paragraphs (g)(6)(i) and (ii) of this
section.
(i) Vented natural gas volume, in
standard cubic feet (‘‘FVs,p’’ in Equation
W–10B of § 98.233).
(ii) Flow rate at the beginning of the
period of time when sufficient
quantities of gas are present to enable
separation, in standard cubic feet per
hour (‘‘FRp,i’’ in Equation W–10B of
§ 98.233).
*
*
*
*
*
(10) Indicate whether the
completion(s) or workover(s) included
flared emissions that are reported
according to paragraph (n) of this
section in addition to the vented
emissions reported under paragraphs
(g)(8) and (9) of this section.
(h) * * *
(1) For each well with one or more gas
well completions without hydraulic
fracturing and without flaring, report
the information specified in paragraphs
(h)(1)(i) through (vi) of this section.
(i) Well ID number.
*
*
*
*
*
(iii) Total number of hours that gas
vented directly to the atmosphere
during venting for all completions
without hydraulic fracturing (‘‘Tp’’ for
completions that vented directly to the
atmosphere as used in Equation W–
13B).
(iv) Average daily gas production rate
for all completions without hydraulic
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
fracturing without flaring, in standard
cubic feet per hour (‘‘Vp’’ in Equation
W–13B of § 98.233). You may delay
reporting of this data element if you
indicate in the annual report that the
well is a wildcat well and/or delineation
well and the only wells that can be used
for the measurement in the same subbasin and well type combination are
wildcat wells and/or delineation wells.
If you elect to delay reporting of this
data element, you must report by the
date specified in paragraph (cc) of this
section the measured average daily gas
production rate during completions for
the well.
*
*
*
*
*
(2) For each well with one or more gas
well completions without hydraulic
fracturing and with flaring, report the
information specified in paragraphs
(h)(2)(i) through (iv) of this section.
(i) Well ID number.
*
*
*
*
*
(iii) Total number of hours that gas
vented to a flare during venting for all
completions without hydraulic
fracturing (the sum of all ‘‘Tp’’ for
completions that vented to a flare from
Equation W–13B).
(iv) Average daily gas production rate
for all completions without hydraulic
fracturing with flaring, in standard
cubic feet per hour (the average of all
‘‘Vp’’ from Equation W–13B of § 98.233).
You may delay reporting of this data
element if you indicate in the annual
report that the well is a wildcat well
and/or delineation well and the only
wells that can be used for the
measurement in the same sub-basin and
well type combination are wildcat wells
and/or delineation wells. If you elect to
delay reporting of this data element, you
must report by the date specified in
paragraph (cc) of this section the
measured average daily gas production
rate during completions for the well.
(3) For each well with one or more gas
well workovers without hydraulic
fracturing and without flaring, report
the information specified in paragraphs
(h)(3)(i) through (iv) of this section.
(i) Well ID number.
*
*
*
*
*
(4) For each well with one or more gas
well workovers without hydraulic
fracturing and with flaring, report the
information specified in paragraphs
(h)(4)(i) and (ii) of this section.
(i) Well ID number.
(ii) Number of workovers that flared
gas.
(i) Blowdown vent stacks. You must
indicate whether your facility has
blowdown vent stacks. If your facility
has blowdown vent stacks, then you
must report whether emissions were
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
calculated by equipment or event type
or by using flow meters or a
combination of both. If you calculated
emissions by equipment or event type
for any blowdown vent stacks, then you
must report the information specified in
paragraph (i)(1) of this section
considering, in aggregate, all blowdown
vent stacks for which emissions were
calculated by equipment or event type.
If you calculated emissions using flow
meters for any blowdown vent stacks,
then you must report the information
specified in paragraph (i)(2) of this
section considering, in aggregate, all
blowdown vent stacks for which
emissions were calculated using flow
meters. For the onshore natural gas
transmission pipeline segment, you
must also report the information in
paragraph (i)(3) of this section. You
must report the information specified in
paragraphs (i)(1) through (3) of this
section, as applicable, for each well-pad
(for onshore production), each gathering
and boosting site (for onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting),
or facility (for all other applicable
industry segments).
(1) Report by equipment or event type.
If you calculated emissions from
blowdown vent stacks by the seven
categories listed in § 98.233(i)(2)(iv)(A)
for onshore petroleum and natural gas
production, onshore natural gas
processing, onshore natural gas
transmission compression, underground
natural gas storage, LNG storage, LNG
import and export equipment, or
onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting industry
segments, then you must report the
equipment or event types and the
information specified in paragraphs
(i)(1)(i) through (iv) of this section for
each equipment or event type. If a
blowdown event resulted in emissions
from multiple equipment types, and the
emissions cannot be apportioned to the
different equipment types, then you
may report the information in
paragraphs (i)(1)(i) through (iv) of this
section for the equipment type that
represented the largest portion of the
emissions for the blowdown event. If
you calculated emissions from
blowdown vent stacks by the eight
categories listed in § 98.233(i)(2)(iv)(B)
for the natural gas distribution or
onshore natural gas transmission
pipeline segments, then you must report
the pipeline segments or event types
and the information specified in
paragraphs (i)(1)(i) through (iv) of this
section for each ‘‘equipment or event
type’’ (i.e., category). If a blowdown
event resulted in emissions from
multiple categories, and the emissions
PO 00000
Frm 00145
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50425
cannot be apportioned to the different
categories, then you may report the
information in paragraphs (i)(1)(i)
through (iv) of this section for the
‘‘equipment or event type’’ (i.e.,
category) that represented the largest
portion of the emissions for the
blowdown event.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).
*
*
*
*
*
(2) Report by flow meter. If you elect
to calculate emissions from blowdown
vent stacks by using a flow meter
according to § 98.233(i)(3), then you
must report the information specified in
paragraphs (i)(2)(i) through (iii) of this
section.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).
(ii) Annual CO2 emissions from all
blowdown vent stacks for which
emissions were calculated using flow
meters, in metric tons CO2 (the sum of
all CO2 mass emission values calculated
according to § 98.233(i)(3), for all flow
meters).
(iii) Annual CH4 emissions from all
blowdown vent stacks at the facility,
well-pad, or gathering and boosting site
for which emissions were calculated
using flow meters, in metric tons CH4,
(the sum of all CH4 mass emission
values calculated according to
§ 98.233(i)(3), for all flow meters).
*
*
*
*
*
(j) Hydrocarbon liquids and produced
water storage tanks. You must indicate
whether your facility sends hydrocarbon
produced liquids and/or produced
water to atmospheric pressure storage
tanks. If your facility sends hydrocarbon
produced liquids and/or produced
water to atmospheric pressure storage
tanks, then you must indicate which
Calculation Method(s) you used to
calculate GHG emissions, and you must
report the information specified in
paragraphs (j)(1) and (2) of this section
as applicable. If you used Calculation
Method 1 or Calculation Method 2 of
§ 98.233(j), and any atmospheric
pressure storage tanks were observed to
have malfunctioning dump valves
during the calendar year, then you must
indicate that dump valves were
malfunctioning and must report the
information specified in paragraph (j)(3)
of this section.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50426
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
(1) If you used Calculation Method 1
or Calculation Method 2 of § 98.233(j) to
calculate GHG emissions, then you must
report the information specified in
paragraphs (j)(1)(i) through (xvi) of this
section for each well-pad (for onshore
petroleum and natural gas production),
gathering and boosting site (for onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting), or facility (for all other
applicable industry segments) and by
calculation method and liquid type, as
applicable. Onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting and
onshore natural gas processing facilities
do not report the information specified
in paragraph (j)(1)(ix) of this section.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).
(ii) Calculation method used, and
name of the software package used if
using Calculation Method 1.
(iii) The total annual hydrocarbon
liquids or produced water volume from
gas-liquid separators and direct from
wells or non-separator equipment that is
sent to applicable atmospheric pressure
storage tanks, in barrels. You may delay
reporting of this data element for
onshore production if you indicate in
the annual report that wildcat wells and
delineation wells are the only wells in
the sub-basin with hydrocarbon liquids
or produced water production flowing
to gas-liquid separators or direct to
atmospheric pressure storage tanks. If
you elect to delay reporting of this data
element, you must report by the date
specified in paragraph (cc) of this
section the total volume of hydrocarbon
liquids or produced water from all wells
and the well ID number(s) for the well(s)
included in this volume.
(iv) The average well, gas-liquid
separator, or non-separator equipment
temperature, in degrees Fahrenheit.
(v) The average well, gas-liquid
separator, or non-separator equipment
pressure, in pounds per square inch
gauge.
(vi) For atmospheric pressure storage
tanks receiving hydrocarbon liquids, the
average sales oil or stabilized
hydrocarbon liquids API gravity, in
degrees.
(vii) For atmospheric pressure storage
tanks receiving hydrocarbon liquids, the
flow-weighted average concentration
(mole fraction) of CO2 in flash gas from
atmospheric pressure storage tanks
(calculated as the sum of all products of
the concentration of CO2 in the flash gas
for each storage tank times the total
quantity of flash gas for that storage
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
tank, divided by the sum of all flash gas
emissions from storage tanks).
(viii) The flow-weighted average
concentration (mole fraction) of CH4 in
flash gas from atmospheric pressure
storage tanks (calculated as the sum of
all products of the concentration of CH4
in the flash gas for each storage tank
times the total quantity of flash gas for
that storage tank, divided by the sum of
all flash gas emissions from storage
tanks).
(ix) The number of wells sending
hydrocarbon liquids or produced water
to gas-liquid separators or directly to
atmospheric pressure storage tanks.
(x) Count of atmospheric pressure
storage tanks specified in paragraphs
(j)(1)(x)(A) through (F) of this section.
(A) The number of fixed roof
atmospheric pressure storage tanks.
(B) The number of floating roof
atmospheric pressure storage tanks.
(C) The number of atmospheric
pressure storage tanks that vented gas
directly to the atmosphere and did not
control emissions using a vapor
recovery system and/or one or more
flares at any point during the reporting
year.
(D) The number of atmospheric
pressure storage tanks that routed
emissions to a vapor recovery system at
any point during the reporting year.
(E) The number of atmospheric
pressure storage tanks that routed
emissions to one or more flares at any
point during the reporting year.
(F) The number of atmospheric
pressure storage tanks in paragraph
(j)(1)(x)(D) or (E) of this section that had
an open or not properly seated thief
hatch at some point during the year
while the storage tank was also routing
emissions to a vapor recovery system
and/or a flare.
(xi) For atmospheric pressure storage
tanks receiving hydrocarbon liquids,
annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons
CO2, that resulted from venting gas
directly to the atmosphere, calculated
according to § 98.233(j)(1) and (2).
(xii) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, that resulted from venting gas
directly to the atmosphere, calculated
according to § 98.233(j)(1) and (2).
(xiii) For the atmospheric pressure
storage tanks receiving hydrocarbon
liquids identified in paragraphs
(j)(1)(x)(D) of this section, total CO2
mass, in metric tons CO2, that was
recovered during the calendar year
using a vapor recovery system.
(xiv) For the atmospheric pressure
storage tanks identified in paragraphs
(j)(1)(x)(D) of this section, total CH4
mass, in metric tons CH4, that was
recovered during the calendar year
using a vapor recovery system.
PO 00000
Frm 00146
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(xv) For the atmospheric pressure
storage tanks identified in paragraph
(j)(1)(x)(F) of this section, the total
volume of gas vented through open or
not properly seated thief hatches, in scf,
during periods while the storage tanks
were also routing emissions to vapor
recovery systems and/or flares.
(2) If you used Calculation Method 3
to calculate GHG emissions, then you
must report the information specified in
paragraphs (j)(2)(i) through (iii) of this
section.
(i) Report the information specified in
paragraphs (j)(2)(i)(A) through (H) of
this section, at the facility level, for
atmospheric pressure storage tanks
where emissions were calculated using
Calculation Method 3 of § 98.233(j).
(A) The total annual hydrocarbon
liquids throughput that is sent to all
atmospheric pressure storage tanks in
the facility with emissions calculated
using Calculation Method 3, in barrels.
You may delay reporting of this data
element for onshore production if you
indicate in the annual report that
wildcat wells and delineation wells are
the only wells in the sub-basin with
hydrocarbon liquids production that
send hydrocarbon liquids to
atmospheric pressure storage tanks. If
you elect to delay reporting of this data
element, you must report by the date
specified in paragraph (cc) of this
section the total annual hydrocarbon
liquids throughput from all wells and
the well ID number(s) for the well(s)
included in this volume.
(B) The total annual produced water
throughput that is sent to all
atmospheric pressure storage tanks in
the facility with emissions calculated
using Calculation Method 3, in barrels,
specified in paragraphs (j)(2)(i)(B)(1)
through (3) of this section. You may
delay reporting of this data element for
onshore production if you indicate in
the annual report that wildcat wells and
delineation wells are the only wells in
the sub-basin flowing to gas-liquid
separators or direct to atmospheric
pressure storage tanks. If you elect to
delay reporting of this data element, you
must report by the date specified in
paragraph (cc) of this section the total
annual volume of produced water from
all wells as specified in paragraphs
(j)(2)(i)(B)(1) through (3) of this section
and the well ID number(s) for the well(s)
included in these volumes.
(1) Total volume of produced water
with pressure less than or equal to 50
psi.
(2) Total volume of produced water
with pressure greater than 50 psi and
less than or equal to 250 psi.
(3) Total volume of produced water
with pressure greater than 250 psi.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
(C) An estimate of the fraction of
hydrocarbon liquids throughput
reported in paragraph (j)(2)(i)(A) of this
section sent to atmospheric pressure
storage tanks in the facility that
controlled emissions with flares.
(D) An estimate of the fraction of
hydrocarbon liquids throughput
reported in paragraph (j)(2)(i)(A) of this
section sent to atmospheric pressure
storage tanks in the facility that
controlled emissions with vapor
recovery systems.
(E) An estimate of the fraction of total
produced water throughput reported in
paragraph (j)(2)(i)(B) of this section sent
to atmospheric pressure storage tanks in
the facility that controlled emissions
with flares.
(F) An estimate of the fraction of total
produced water throughput reported in
paragraph (j)(2)(i)(B) of this section sent
to atmospheric pressure storage tanks in
the facility that controlled emissions
with vapor recovery systems.
(G) The number of fixed roof
atmospheric pressure storage tanks in
the facility.
(H) The number of floating roof
atmospheric pressure storage tanks in
the facility.
(ii) Report the information specified
in paragraphs (j)(2)(ii)(A) through (H) of
this section for each well-pad (for
onshore production), gathering and
boosting site (for onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting), or
facility (for all other applicable industry
segments) with atmospheric pressure
storage tanks receiving hydrocarbon
liquids whose emissions were
calculated using § 98.233(j)(3)(i).
(A) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).
(B) The number of atmospheric
pressure storage tanks that did not
control emissions with flares and for
which emissions were calculated using
Calculation Method 3.
(C) The number of atmospheric
pressure storage tanks that controlled
emissions with flares and for which
emissions were calculated using
Calculation Method 3.
(D) The number of atmospheric
pressure storage tanks that had an open
or not properly seated thief hatch at
some point during the year while the
storage tank was also routing emissions
to a vapor recovery system and/or a
flare.
(E) The total number of separators,
wells, or non-separator equipment with
annual average daily hydrocarbon
liquids throughput greater than 0 barrels
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
per day and less than 10 barrels per day
for which you used Calculation Method
3 (‘‘Count’’ from Equation W–15A of
this subpart).
(F) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, that resulted from venting gas
directly to the atmosphere, calculated
using Equation W–15A of § 98.233(j)
and adjusted using the requirements
described in § 98.233(j)(4), if applicable.
(G) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, that resulted from venting gas
directly to the atmosphere, calculated
using Equation W–15A of § 98.233(j)
and adjusted using the requirements
described in § 98.233(j)(4), if applicable.
(H) The total volume of gas vented
through open or not properly seated
thief hatches, in scf, during periods
while the atmospheric pressure storage
tanks were also routing emissions to
vapor recovery systems and/or flares.
(iii) Report the information specified
in paragraphs (j)(2)(iii)(A) through (F) of
this section for each well-pad (for
onshore production), gathering and
boosting site (for onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting), or
facility (for onshore natural gas
processing) with atmospheric pressure
storage tanks receiving produced water
whose emissions were calculated using
§ 98.233(j)(3)(ii).
(A) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).
(B) The number of atmospheric
pressure storage tanks that did not
control emissions with flares and for
which emissions were calculated using
Calculation Method 3.
(C) The number of atmospheric
pressure storage tanks that controlled
emissions with flares and for which
emissions were calculated using
Calculation Method 3.
(D) The number of atmospheric
pressure storage tanks that had an open
or not properly seated thief hatch at
some point during the year while the
storage tank was also routing emissions
to a vapor recovery system and/or a
flare.
(E) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, that resulted from venting gas
directly to the atmosphere, calculated
using Equation W–15B of § 98.233(j) and
adjusted using the requirements
described in § 98.233(j)(4), if applicable.
(F) The total volume of gas vented
through open or not properly seated
thief hatches, in scf, during periods
while the atmospheric pressure storage
tanks were also routing emissions to
vapor recovery systems and/or flares.
PO 00000
Frm 00147
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50427
(3) If you used Calculation Method 1
or Calculation Method 2 of § 98.233(j),
and any gas-liquid separator liquid
dump values did not close properly
during the calendar year, then you must
report the information specified in
paragraphs (j)(3)(i) through (v) of this
section for each well-pad (for onshore
production), gathering and boosting site
(for onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting), or facility (for
all other applicable industry segments)
by liquid type.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).
(ii) The total number of gas-liquid
separators whose liquid dump valves
did not close properly during the
calendar year.
(iii) The total time the dump valves
on gas-liquid separators did not close
properly in the calendar year, in hours
(sum of the ‘‘Tdv’’ values used in
Equation W–16 of this subpart).
(iv) For atmospheric pressure storage
tanks receiving hydrocarbon liquids,
annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons
CO2, that resulted from dump valves on
gas-liquid separators not closing
properly during the calendar year,
calculated using Equation W–16 of this
subpart.
(v) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, that resulted from the dump
valves on gas-liquid separators not
closing properly during the calendar
year, calculated using Equation W–16 of
this subpart.
(k) Condensate storage tanks. You
must indicate whether your facility
contains any condensate storage tanks.
If your facility contains at least one
condensate storage tank, then you must
report the information specified in
paragraphs (k)(1) and (2) of this section
for each condensate storage tank vent
stack.
(1) For each condensate storage tank
vent stack, report the information
specified in (k)(1)(i) through (iv) of this
section.
(i) The unique name or ID number for
the condensate storage tank vent stack.
(ii) Indicate if a flare is attached to the
condensate storage tank vent stack.
(iii) Indicate whether scrubber dump
valve leakage occurred for the
condensate storage tank vent according
to § 98.233(k)(1).
(iv) Which method specified in
§ 98.233(k)(1) was used to determine if
dump valve leakage occurred.
(2) If scrubber dump valve leakage
occurred for a condensate storage tank
vent stack, as reported in paragraph
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50428
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
(k)(1)(iii) of this section, and the vent
stack vented directly to the atmosphere
during the calendar year, then you must
report the information specified in
paragraphs (k)(2)(i) through (v) of this
section for each condensate storage vent
stack where scrubber dump valve
leakage occurred.
(i) Which method specified in
§ 98.233(k)(2) was used to measure the
leak rate.
*
*
*
*
*
(l) * * *
(1) For oil wells not routed to a flare,
you must report the information
specified in paragraphs (l)(1)(i) through
(vii) of this section for each well tested.
(i) [Reserved]
(ii) Well ID number.
(iii) Number of well testing days for
the tested well in the calendar year.
(iv) Average gas to oil ratio for the
tested well, in cubic feet of gas per
barrel of oil.
(v) Average flow rate for the tested
well, in barrels of oil per day. You may
delay reporting of this data element if
you indicate in the annual report that
the well is a wildcat well and/or
delineation well and the only oil wells
that are tested in the same basin are
wildcat wells and/or delineation wells.
If you elect to delay reporting of this
data element, you must report by the
date specified in paragraph (cc) of this
section the measured average flow rate
for the tested well.
*
*
*
*
*
(2) For oil wells routed to a flare, you
must report the information specified in
paragraphs (l)(2)(i) through (v) of this
section for each well tested. All reported
data elements should be specific to the
well for which Equation W–17A of
§ 98.233 was used and for which well
testing emissions were routed to flares.
(i) [Reserved]
(ii) Well ID number.
(iii) Number of well testing days for
the tested well in the calendar year.
(iv) Average gas to oil ratio for the
tested well, in cubic feet of gas per
barrel of oil.
(v) Average flow rate for the tested
well, in barrels of oil per day. You may
delay reporting of this data element if
you indicate in the annual report that
the well is a wildcat well and/or
delineation well and the only wells that
are tested in the same basin are wildcat
wells and/or delineation wells. If you
elect to delay reporting of this data
element, you must report by the date
specified in paragraph (cc) of this
section the measured average flow rate
for the tested well.
(3) For gas wells not routed to a flare,
you must report the information
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
specified in paragraphs (l)(3)(i) through
(vi) of this section for each well tested.
(i) [Reserved]
(ii) Well ID number.
(iii) Number of well testing days for
the tested well(s) in the calendar year.
(iv) Average annual production rate
for the tested well, in actual cubic feet
per day. You may delay reporting of this
data element if you indicate in the
annual report that the well is a wildcat
well and/or delineation well and the
only wells that are tested in the same
basin are wildcat wells and/or
delineation wells. If you elect to delay
reporting of this data element, you must
report by the date specified in paragraph
(cc) of this section the measured average
annual production rate for the tested
well.
*
*
*
*
*
(4) For gas wells routed to a flare, you
must report the information specified in
paragraphs (l)(4)(i) through (iv) of this
section for each well tested. All reported
data elements should be specific to the
well for which Equation W–17B of
§ 98.233 was used and for which well
testing emissions were routed to flares.
(i) [Reserved]
(ii) Well ID number.
(iii) Number of well testing days for
the tested well in the calendar year.
(iv) Average annual production rate
for the tested well, in actual cubic feet
per day. You may delay reporting of this
data element if you indicate in the
annual report that the well is a wildcat
well and/or delineation well and the
only wells that are tested in the same
basin are wildcat wells and/or
delineation wells. If you elect to delay
reporting of this data element, you must
report by the date specified in paragraph
(cc) of this section the measured average
annual production rate for the tested
well.
(m) Associated natural gas. You must
indicate whether any associated gas was
vented or flared during the calendar
year. If associated gas was vented during
the calendar year, then you must report
the information specified in paragraphs
(m)(1) through (7) of this section for
each well for which associated gas was
vented. If associated gas was flared
during the calendar year, then you must
report the information specified in
paragraphs (m)(1) through (3) of this
section for each well for which
associated gas was flared.
(1) Well ID number.
*
*
*
*
*
(4) Average gas to oil ratio, in
standard cubic feet of gas per barrel of
oil. Do not report the GOR if you vented
or flared associated gas and used a
continuous flow monitor to determine
PO 00000
Frm 00148
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
the total volume of associated gas
vented or routed to the flare (i.e., if you
did not use Equation W–18 for the well
with associated gas venting or flaring
emissions).
(5) Volume of oil produced by the
well, in barrels, in the calendar year
only during the time periods in which
associated gas was vented or flared
(‘‘Vp’’ used in Equation W–18 of
§ 98.233). You may delay reporting of
this data element if you indicate in the
annual report that the well is a wildcat
well and/or delineation well and the
only wells from which associated gas
was vented or flared in the same subbasin are wildcat wells and/or
delineation wells. If you elect to delay
reporting of this data element, you must
report by the date specified in paragraph
(cc) of this section the volume of oil
produced by the well during the time
periods in which associated gas venting
and flaring was occurring. Do not report
the volume of oil produced if you
vented or flared associated gas and used
a continuous flow monitor to determine
the total volume of associated gas
vented or routed to the flare (i.e., if you
did not use Equation W–18 for the well
with associated gas venting or flaring
emissions).
(6) Total volume of associated gas sent
to sales or used on site and not sent to
a vent or flare, in standard cubic feet, in
the calendar year only during time
periods in which associated gas was
vented or flared (‘‘SG’’ value used in
Equation W–18 of § 98.233(m)). You
may delay reporting of this data element
if you indicate in the annual report that
the well is a wildcat well and/or
delineation well and the only wells
from which associated gas was vented
or flared in the same basin are wildcat
wells and/or delineation wells. If you
elect to delay reporting of this data
element, you must report by the date
specified in paragraph (cc) of this
section the measured total volume of
associated gas sent to sales for the well
during the time periods in which
associated gas venting and flaring was
occurring. Do not report the volume of
gas sent to sales if you vented or flared
associated gas and used a continuous
flow monitor to determine the total
volume of associated gas vented or
routed to the flare (i.e., if you did not
use Equation W–18).
(7) If you had associated gas
emissions vented directly to the
atmosphere without flaring, then you
must report the information specified in
paragraphs (m)(7)(i) through (viii) of this
section for each well.
(i) [Reserved]
(ii) Indicate whether the associated
gas volume vented from the well was
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
measured using a continuous flow
monitor.
(iii) Indicate whether associated gas
streams vented from the well were
measured with continuous gas
composition analyzers.
(iv) Total volume of associated gas
vented from the well, in standard cubic
feet.
(v) Flow-weighted average mole
fraction of CH4 in associated gas vented
from the well.
(vi) Flow-weighted average mole
fraction of CO2 in associated gas vented
from the well.
(vii) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, calculated according to
§ 98.233(m)(3) and (4).
(viii) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, calculated according to
§ 98.233(m)(3) and (4).
(n) Flare stacks. You must indicate if
your facility has any flare stacks. You
must report the information specified in
paragraphs (n)(1) through (20) of this
section for each flare stack at your
facility.
(1) Unique name or ID for the flare
stack. For the onshore petroleum and
natural gas production and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segments, a different
name or ID may be used for a single
flare stack for each location where it
operates at in a given calendar year.
(2) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).
(3) Unique IDs for each stream routed
to the flare if you measure the flow of
each stream that is routed to the flare as
specified in § 98.233(n)(1)(ii) and/or you
measure the gas composition for each
stream routed to the flare as specified in
§ 98.233(n)(3)(iii) or (iv).
(4) Indicate the type of flare (i.e., open
ground-level flare, enclosed groundlevel flare, open elevated flare, or
enclosed elevated flare).
(5) Indicate the type of flare assist
(i.e., unassisted, air-assisted with single
speed fan/blower, air-assisted with dual
speed fan/blower, air-assisted with
variable speed fan/blower, steamassisted, or pressure-assisted).
(6) Indicate whether the pilot flame or
combustion flame was monitored
continuously, visually inspected, or
both. If visually inspected, report the
number of inspections during the year,
and indicate whether the flare has a
continuous pilot or auto igniter. If the
pilot flame was monitored
continuously, report the number of
times the continuous monitoring device
was out of service or otherwise
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
inoperable for a period of more than one
week.
(7) Indicate whether the volume of gas
was determined using a continuous flow
measurement device or whether it was
determined using parameter monitoring
and engineering calculations
(§ 98.233(n)(1)(i) for inlet gas to the flare
or § 98.233(n)(1)(ii) for each stream
routed to the flare). If you switched from
one method to the other during the year,
then indicate both methods were used.
(8) Indicate whether the gas
composition was calculated using a
continuous gas composition analyzer or
by taking samples of the applicable gas
stream(s) at least once per quarter
(§ 98.233(n)(3)(i) or (iii) for the inlet gas
to the flare or § 98.233(n)(3)(ii) or (iv) for
the streams from each source that routes
emissions to the flare). If you switched
from one method to the other during the
year, then indicate both methods were
used.
(9) Flare-specific HHV, if you
determined a flare-specific HHV based
on measured composition of the inlet
gas to the flare as specified in
§ 98.233(n)(8)(i) or if you calculated a
flare-specific HHV based on the
calculated flow-weighted average
composition for the inlet gas to the flare
as specified in § 98.233(n)(8)(iii). Each
individual stream HHV, if you
determined HHVs for each individual
stream routed to the flare and you used
these HHVs to calculate N2O emissions
for each stream as specified in
§ 98.233(n)(8)(ii).
(10) For the onshore petroleum and
natural gas production, onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting, and onshore natural gas
processing industry segments, estimated
fraction of total volume flared that was
received from another facility solely for
flaring (e.g., gas separated from liquid at
a production facility that is routed to a
flare that is assigned to an onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facility).
(11) Volume of gas sent to the flare,
in standard cubic feet (‘‘Vs’’ in
Equations W–19 and W–20 of this
subpart). If you determine the volume of
gas for each stream routed to the flare
as specified in § 98.233(n)(1)(ii), then
also report the annual volume of each
measured stream.
(12) Fraction of the feed gas sent to an
un-lit flare based on total time when
continuous monitoring of the pilot or
periodic inspections indicated the flare
was not lit and the flow determined by
continuous measurement of flow
conducted during the times when the
flare was not lit (‘‘Zu’’ in Equation W–
19 of this subpart).
PO 00000
Frm 00149
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50429
(13) Flare combustion efficiency,
expressed as the fraction of gas
combusted by a burning flare
(§ 98.233(n)(4)). If you used multiple
monitoring methods during the year,
report the flow-weighted average
combustion efficiency based on each
tier that applied. Report the efficiency to
one decimal place.
(i) If you report using the 95 percent
default combustion efficiency, indicate
if you are subject to part 60, subpart
OOOOb of this chapter or if you are
electing to comply with the flare
monitoring requirements in part 60,
subpart OOOOb of this chapter.
(ii) If you are not required to comply
with part 60, subpart OOOOb of this
chapter but you elect to comply with the
monitoring requirements in
§ 60.5417b(d)(1)(viii) of this chapter as
specified in § 98.233(n)(4), indicate
whether you use a calorimeter to
continuously determine net heating
value (NHV) or if you have
demonstrated according to the methods
described in § 60.5417b(d)(1)(viii)(C) of
this chapter that the NHV consistently
exceeds the operating limit specified in
§ 60.18 of this chapter (or that it
consistently exceeds 800 Btu/scf for a
pressure assist flare).
(14) Annual average mole fraction of
CH4 in the feed gas to the flare if you
measure composition of the inlet gas as
specified in § 98.233(n)(3)(i) or (ii)
(‘‘XCH4’’ in Equation W–19 of this
subpart), or the annual average CH4
mole fractions for each stream if you
measure composition of each stream
routed to the flare as specified in
§ 98.233(n)(3)(iii) or (iv).
(15) Annual average mole fraction of
CO2 in the feed gas to the flare if you
measure composition of the inlet gas as
specified in § 98.233(n)(3)(i) or (ii)
(‘‘XCO2’’ in Equation W–20 of this
subpart), or the annual average CO2
mole fractions for each stream if you
measure composition of each stream
routed to the flare as specified in
§ 98.233(n)(3)(iii) or (iv).
(16) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2 (refer to Equation W–20 of this
subpart).
(17) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4 (refer to Equation W–19 of this
subpart).
(18) Annual N2O emissions, in metric
tons N2O (refer to Equation W–40 of this
subpart).
(19) Estimated disaggregated CH4,
CO2, and N2O emissions attributed to
each source type as determined using
engineering calculations and best
available data as specified in
§ 98.233(n)(10) (i.e., AGR vents,
dehydrator vents, well venting during
completions and workovers with
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50430
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
hydraulic fracturing, gas well venting
during completions and workovers
without hydraulic fracturing,
hydrocarbon liquids and produced
water storage tanks, well testing venting
and flaring, associated gas venting and
flaring, other flared sources).
(20) Indicate whether a CEMS was
used to measure emissions from the
flare. If a CEMS was used, then you are
not required to report the CO2 mole
fraction in paragraph (n)(15) of this
section.
(o) Centrifugal compressors. You must
indicate whether your facility has
centrifugal compressors. You must
report the information specified in
paragraphs (o)(1) and (2) of this section
for all centrifugal compressors at your
facility. For each compressor source or
manifolded group of compressor sources
that you conduct as found leak
measurements as specified in
§ 98.233(o)(2) or (4), you must report the
information specified in paragraph
(o)(3) of this section. For each
compressor source or manifolded group
of compressor sources that you conduct
continuous monitoring as specified in
§ 98.233(o)(3) or (5), you must report the
information specified in paragraph
(o)(4) of this section. Centrifugal
compressors in onshore petroleum and
natural gas production and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting that calculate emissions
according to § 98.233(o)(10)(iii) are not
required to report information in
paragraphs (o)(1) through (4) of this
section and instead must report the
information specified in paragraph
(o)(5) of this section.
(1) Compressor activity data. Report
the information specified in paragraphs
(o)(1)(i) through (xi) of this section, as
applicable, for each centrifugal
compressor located at your facility.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).
(ii) Unique name or ID for the
centrifugal compressor.
(iii) Hours in operating-mode.
(iv) Hours in standby-pressurizedmode.
(v) Hours in not-operatingdepressurized-mode.
(vi) If you conducted volumetric
emission measurements as specified in
§ 98.233(o)(1):
(A) Indicate whether the compressor
was measured in operating-mode.
(B) Indicate whether the compressor
was measured in standby-pressurizedmode.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
(C) Indicate whether the compressor
was measured in not-operatingdepressurized-mode.
(vii) Indicate whether the compressor
has blind flanges installed and
associated dates.
(viii) Indicate whether the compressor
has wet or dry seals.
(ix) If the compressor has wet seals,
the number of wet seals.
(x) If the compressor has dry seals, the
number of dry seals.
(xi) Power output of the compressor
driver (hp).
(2) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) Centrifugal compressor name or
ID. Use the same ID as in paragraph
(o)(1)(ii) of this section.
(B) Centrifugal compressor source
(wet seal, dry seal, isolation valve, or
blowdown valve).
*
*
*
*
*
(ii) * * *
(A) Indicate whether the leak or vent
is for a single compressor source or
manifolded group of compressor sources
and whether the emissions from the leak
or vent are released to the atmosphere,
routed to a flare, combustion, or vapor
recovery system.
*
*
*
*
*
(D) Report emissions as specified in
paragraphs (o)(2)(ii)(D)(1) and (2) of this
section for the leak or vent. If the leak
or vent is routed to a flare, combustion,
or vapor recovery system, you are not
required to report emissions under this
paragraph.
*
*
*
*
*
(E) If the leak or vent is routed to
flare, combustion, or vapor recovery
system, report the percentage of time
that the respective device was
operational when the compressor source
emissions were routed to the device.
*
*
*
*
*
(5) Onshore petroleum and natural
gas production and onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting.
Centrifugal compressors with wet seal
degassing vents in onshore petroleum
and natural gas production and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting that calculate emissions
according to § 98.233(o)(10)(iii) must
report the information specified in
paragraphs (o)(5)(i) through (iv) of this
section. You must report the
information specified in paragraphs
(o)(5)(i) through (iv) of this section, as
applicable, for each well-pad (for
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production) or each gathering and
boosting site (for onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting).
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
PO 00000
Frm 00150
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).
(ii) Report the following activity data.
(A) Total number of centrifugal
compressors at the facility.
(B) Number of centrifugal
compressors that have wet seals.
(C) Number of centrifugal
compressors that have atmospheric wet
seal oil degassing vents (i.e., wet seal oil
degassing vents where the emissions are
released to the atmosphere rather than
being routed to flares, combustion, or
vapor recovery systems).
(iii) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, from centrifugal compressors
with atmospheric wet seal oil degassing
vents.
(iv) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, from centrifugal compressors
with atmospheric wet seal oil degassing
vents.
(p) Reciprocating compressors. You
must indicate whether your facility has
reciprocating compressors. You must
report the information specified in
paragraphs (p)(1) and (2) of this section
for all reciprocating compressors at your
facility. For each compressor source or
manifolded group of compressor sources
that you conduct as found leak
measurements as specified in
§ 98.233(p)(2) or (4), you must report the
information specified in paragraph
(p)(3) of this section. For each
compressor source or manifolded group
of compressor sources that you conduct
continuous monitoring as specified in
§ 98.233(p)(3) or (5), you must report the
information specified in paragraph
(p)(4) of this section. Reciprocating
compressors in onshore petroleum and
natural gas production and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting that calculate emissions
according to § 98.233(p)(10)(iii) are not
required to report information in
paragraphs (p)(1) through (4) of this
section and instead must report the
information specified in paragraph
(p)(5) of this section.
(1) Compressor activity data. Report
the information specified in paragraphs
(p)(1)(i) through (viii) of this section, as
applicable, for each reciprocating
compressor located at your facility.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).
(ii) Unique name or ID for the
reciprocating compressor.
(iii) Hours in operating-mode.
(iv) Hours in standby-pressurizedmode.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
(v) Hours in not-operatingdepressurized-mode.
(vi) If you conducted volumetric
emission measurements as specified in
§ 98.233(p)(1):
(A) Indicate whether the compressor
was measured in operating-mode.
(B) Indicate whether the compressor
was measured in standby-pressurizedmode.
(C) Indicate whether the compressor
was measured in not-operatingdepressurized-mode.
(vii) Indicate whether the compressor
has blind flanges installed and
associated dates.
(viii) Power output of the compressor
driver (hp).
(2) * * *
(ii) * * *
(A) Indicate whether the leak or vent
is for a single compressor source or
manifolded group of compressor sources
and whether the emissions from the leak
or vent are released to the atmosphere,
routed to a flare, combustion, or vapor
recovery system.
*
*
*
*
*
(D) Report emissions as specified in
paragraphs (p)(2)(ii)(D)(1) and (2) of this
section for the leak or vent. If the leak
or vent is routed to a flare, combustion,
or vapor recovery system, you are not
required to report emissions under this
paragraph.
*
*
*
*
*
(E) If the leak or vent is routed to a
flare, combustion, or vapor recovery
system, report the percentage of time
that the respective device was
operational when the compressor source
emissions were routed to the device.
(3) * * *
(ii) For each compressor mode-source
combination where a reporter emission
factor as calculated in Equation W–28
was used to calculate emissions in
Equation W–27, report the information
specified in paragraphs (p)(3)(ii)(A)
through (D) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(5) Onshore petroleum and natural
gas production and onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting.
Reciprocating compressors in onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
and onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting that calculate
emissions according to
§ 98.233(p)(10)(iii) must report the
information specified in paragraphs
(p)(5)(i) through (iv) of this section. You
must report the information specified in
paragraphs (p)(5)(i) through (iv) of this
section, as applicable, for each well-pad
(for onshore petroleum and natural gas
production) or each gathering and
boosting site (for onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).
(ii) Report the following activity data.
(A) Total number of reciprocating
compressors at the facility.
(B) Number of reciprocating
compressors that have rod packing
emissions vented directly to the
atmosphere (i.e., rod packing vents
where the emissions are released to the
atmosphere rather than being routed to
flares, combustion, or vapor recovery
systems).
(iii) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, from reciprocating
compressors with rod packing emissions
vented directly to the atmosphere.
(iv) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, from reciprocating
compressors with rod packing emissions
vented directly to the atmosphere.
(q) Equipment leak surveys. For any
components subject to or complying
with the requirements of § 98.233(q),
you must report the information
specified in paragraphs (q)(1) and (2) of
this section. You must report the
information specified in paragraphs
(q)(1) and (2) of this section, as
applicable, for each well-pad (for
onshore production), gathering and
boosting site (for onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting), or
facility (for all other applicable industry
segments). Natural gas distribution
facilities with emission sources listed in
§ 98.232(i)(1) must also report the
information specified in paragraph
(q)(3) of this section.
(1) You must report the information
specified in paragraphs (q)(1)(i) through
(ix) of this section.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).
(ii) Except as specified in paragraph
(q)(1)(iii) of this section, the number of
complete equipment leak surveys
performed during the calendar year.
(iii) Natural gas distribution facilities
performing equipment leak surveys
across a multiple year leak survey cycle
must report the number of years in the
leak survey cycle.
(iv) Except for natural gas distribution
facilities, indicate whether any of the
leak detection surveys used in
calculating emissions per § 98.233(q)(2)
were conducted for compliance with
any of the standards in paragraphs
(q)(1)(iv)(A) through (E) of this section.
Report the indication per well-pad,
PO 00000
Frm 00151
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50431
gathering and boosting site, or facility,
not per component type, as applicable.
(A) The well site or compressor
station fugitive emissions standards in
§ 60.5397a of this chapter.
(B) The well site, centralized
production facility, or compressor
station fugitive emissions standards in
§ 60.5397b of this chapter.
(C) The well site, centralized
production facility, or compressor
station fugitive emissions standards in
an applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of
this chapter.
(D) The standards for equipment leaks
at onshore natural gas processing plants
in § 60.5400b of this chapter.
(E) The standards for equipment leaks
at onshore natural gas processing plants
in an applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of
this chapter.
(v) For facilities in onshore petroleum
and natural gas production, onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting, onshore natural gas
transmission compression, underground
natural gas storage, LNG storage, and
LNG import and export equipment,
indicate whether you elected to comply
with § 98.233(q) according to
§ 98.233(q)(1)(iv) for any equipment
components at your well-pad, gathering
and boosting site, or facility.
(vi) Report each type of method
described in § 98.234(a) that was used to
conduct leak surveys.
(vii) Report whether emissions were
calculated using Calculation Method 1
(leaker factor emission calculation
methodology) and/or using Calculation
Method 2 (leaker measurement
methodology).
(viii) For facilities in onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
and onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting, report the
number of major equipment (as listed in
Table W–1) by service type for which
leak detection surveys were conducted
and emissions calculated according to
§ 98.233(q).
(ix) For facilities in onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
and onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting, report the
number of major equipment (as listed in
Table W–1) in vacuum service as
defined in § 98.238.
(2) You must indicate whether your
facility contains any of the component
types subject to or complying with
§ 98.233(q) that are listed in
§ 98.232(c)(21), (d)(7), (e)(7) or (8), (f)(5)
through (8), (g)(4), (g)(6) or (7), (h)(5),
(h)(7) or (8), (i)(1), or (j)(10) for your
facility’s industry segment. For each
component type and leak detection
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50432
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
method combination that is located at
your well-pad, gathering and boosting
site, or facility, you must report the
information specified in paragraphs
(q)(2)(i) through (ix) of this section. If a
component type is located at your wellpad, gathering and boosting site, or
facility and no leaks were identified
from that component, then you must
report the information in paragraphs
(q)(2)(i) through (ix) of this section but
report a zero (‘‘0’’) for the information
required according to paragraphs
(q)(2)(vi) through (ix) of this section. If
you used Calculation Method 1 (leaker
factor emission calculation
methodology) for some complete leak
surveys and used Calculation Method 2
(leaker measurement methodology) for
some complete leak surveys, you must
report the information specified in
paragraphs (q)(2)(i) through (ix) of this
section separately for component
surveys using Calculation Method 1 and
Calculation Method 2.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).
(ii) Component type.
(iii) Leak detection method used for
the screening survey (e.g., Method 21 as
specified in § 98.234(a)(2)(i); Method 21
as specified in § 98.234(a)(2)(ii); and
OGI and other leak detection methods as
specified in § 98.234(a)(1), (3), or (5)).
(iv) Emission factor or measurement
method used (e.g., default emission
factor; site-specific emission factor
developed according to § 98.233(q)(4);
or direct measurement according to
§ 98.233(q)(3)).
(v) Total number of components
surveyed by type and leak detection
method in the calendar year.
(vi) Total number of the surveyed
component types by leak detection
method that were identified as leaking
in the calendar year (‘‘xp’’ in Equation
W–30 of this subpart for the component
type or the number of leaks measured
for the specified component type
according to the provisions in
§ 98.233(q)(3)).
(vii) Average time the surveyed
components are assumed to be leaking
and operational, in hours (average of
‘‘Tp,z’’ from Equation W–30 of this
subpart for the component type or
average duration of leaks for the
specified component type determined
according to the provisions in
§ 98.233(q)(3)(ii)).
(viii) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, for the component type as
calculated using Equation W–30 or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
§ 98.233(q)(3)(vii) (for surveyed
components only).
(ix) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, for the component type as
calculated using Equation W–30 or
§ 98.233(q)(3)(vii) (for surveyed
components only).
*
*
*
*
*
(r) Equipment leaks by population
count. If your facility is subject to the
requirements of § 98.233(r), then you
must report the information specified in
paragraphs (r)(1) through (3) of this
section, as applicable. You must report
the information specified in paragraphs
(r)(1) through (3) of this section, as
applicable, for each well-pad (for
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production), gathering and boosting site
(for onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting), or facility (for
all other applicable industry segments).
(1) You must indicate whether your
facility contains any of the emission
source types required to use Equation
W–32A of § 98.233. You must report the
information specified in paragraphs
(r)(1)(i) through (vi) of this section
separately for each emission source type
required to use Equation W–32A that is
located at your facility. For each wellpad and gathering and boosting site at
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facilities and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities you must report the
information specified in paragraphs
(r)(1)(i) through (vi) of this section
separately by equipment type and
service type.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).
(ii) Emission source type. Onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
facilities and onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities must report the equipment
type and service type.
(iii) Total number of the emission
source type at the well-pad, gathering
and boosting site, or facility, as
applicable (‘‘Counte’’ in Equation W–
32A of this subpart).
(iv) Average estimated time that the
emission source type was operational in
the calendar year, in hours (‘‘Te’’ in
Equation W–32A of this subpart).
(v) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, for the emission source type.
(vi) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, for the emission source type.
*
*
*
*
*
(3) You must indicate whether your
facility contains any emission source
PO 00000
Frm 00152
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
types in vacuum service as defined in
§ 98.238. If your facility contains
equipment in vacuum service, you must
report the information specified in
paragraphs (r)(3)(i) through (iii) of this
section separately for each emission
source type in vacuum service that is
located at your well-pad, gathering and
boosting site, or facility, as applicable.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).
(ii) Emission source type.
(iii) Total number of the emission
source type at the well-pad, gathering
and boosting site, or facility, as
applicable.
(s) Offshore petroleum and natural
gas production. You must report the
information specified in paragraphs
(s)(1) through (3) of this section for your
facility.
(1) For facilities that report to BOEM’s
emissions inventory, the BOEM Facility
ID(s) that correspond(s) to this facility.
(2) If you adjusted emissions
according to § 98.233(s)(1)(i) or (s)(2)(i),
report the information specified in
paragraphs (s)(2)(i) and (ii) of this
section.
(i) Facility operating hours for the
year of the most recent BOEM emissions
inventory.
(ii) Facility operating hours for the
current year.
(3) For each emission source type
listed in the most recently published
BOEM emissions inventory, report the
information specified in paragraphs
(s)(3)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2.
(ii) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4.
(iii) Annual N2O emissions, in metric
tons N2O.
*
*
*
*
*
(x) * * *
(1) Well-pad ID.
*
*
*
*
*
(y) Other large release events. You
must indicate whether there were any
other large release events from your
facility during the reporting year and
indicate whether your facility was
notified of a potential super-emitter
release under the provisions of
§ 60.5371b of this chapter or an
applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of
this chapter. If there were any other
large release events, you must report the
total number of other large release
events from your facility that occurred
during the reporting year and, for each
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
other large release event, report the
information specified in paragraphs
(y)(1) through (10) of this section. If you
received a notification of a potential
super-emitter release from a third-party
for this facility or a super-emitter release
notification under the provisions of
§ 60.5371b of this chapter or an
applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of
this chapter, you must also report the
information specified in paragraph
(y)(11) of this section.
(1) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).
(2) Unique release event identification
number (e.g., Event 1, Event 2).
(3) The latitude and longitude of the
release in decimal degrees to at least
four digits to the right of the decimal
point.
(4) The approximate start date, start
time, and duration (in hours) of the
release event, and an indication of how
the start date and time were determined
(determined based on pressure monitor,
temperature monitor, other monitored
process parameter (specify), assigned
based on last monitoring or
measurement survey showing no large
release, or used the 182-day default
maximum duration).
(5) A general description of the event.
Include:
(i) Identification of the equipment
involved in the release.
(ii) A description of how the release
occurred, from one of the following
categories: maintenance event, fire/
explosion, gas well blowout, oil well
blowout, gas well release, oil well
release, pressure relief, large leak, and
other (specify).
(iii) An indication of whether the
release exceeded a threshold in
§ 98.233(y)(1)(i) or in § 98.233(y)(1)(ii).
(iv) A description of the technology or
method used to identify the release.
(v) An indication of whether the
release was identified under the
provisions of § 60.5371b of this chapter
or an applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of
this chapter or a third-party notification
and, if the release was identified under
the provisions of § 60.5371b of this
chapter or an applicable approved state
plan or applicable Federal plan in part
62 of this chapter or a third-party
notification, a unique notification ID
number for the notification as assigned
in paragraph (y)(11)(i) of this section.
(vi) An indication of whether a
portion of the natural gas released was
combusted during the release, and if so,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
the fraction of the natural gas released
that was estimated to be combusted and
the assumed combustion efficiency for
the combusted natural gas.
(6) The total volume of gas released
during the event in standard cubic feet.
(7) The volume fraction of CO2 in the
gas released during the event.
(8) The volume fraction of CH4 in the
gas released during the event.
(9) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, from the release event that
occurred during the reporting year.
(10) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, from the release event that
occurred during the reporting year and
the maximum CH4 emissions rate, in
kilograms per hour, determined for any
period of the event according to the
provisions of § 98.233(y)(2)(i).
(11) Report the total number of superemitter release notifications received
from a third party for this facility during
the reporting year and, for each such
super-emitter release notification, report
the information specified in paragraphs
(y)(11)(i) through (vi) of this section.
(i) Unique notification identification
number (e.g., Notification_01,
Notification_02). If a unique notification
number was provided with a
notification received under the
provisions of § 60.5371b of this chapter,
an applicable approved state plan, or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of
this chapter, report the number
associated with the event provided in
the notification.
(ii) The latitude and longitude of the
release as provided in the notification.
(iii) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only) to
which the notification was attributed.
(iv) An indication of whether the
super-emitter release notification was
received under the provisions of
§ 60.5371b of this chapter, an applicable
approved state plan, or applicable
Federal plan in part 62 of this chapter,
or from another third-party. If the
notification was received from another
third-party, report the following
information about the notifier and data
received, if known.
(A) The name of the person and/or
company that provided the notification.
(B) The method used during by the
notifier to quantify the emissions
(satellite detection; remote-sensing
equipment on aircraft; mobile
monitoring platform; other, specify; or
unknown).
(C) The date(s) and time(s) the
measurement was made.
PO 00000
Frm 00153
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50433
(D) The measured methane emission
rate and uncertainty bounds (in
kilograms per hour).
(v) Based on any assessment or
investigation triggered by the
notification, indicate if the emissions
were from normal operations, a planned
maintenance event, leaking equipment,
malfunctioning equipment or device, or
undetermined cause.
(vi) An indication of whether the
emissions identified via the notification
are included in annual emissions
reported for under this subpart and, if
so, the source type under which those
emissions are reported. If the emissions
were reported following the
requirements of § 98.233(y) as an other
large release event, report the unique
release event identification number
assigned to the other large release event
as reported in paragraph (y)(2) of this
section. If the emissions identified via
the notification are not included in
annual emissions reported under this
subpart, you must provide the reason for
not including the emissions related to
this notification (the emissions could
not be verified or corroborated during
site inspection or facility data records;
the location of the emissions as
provided in the notification do not
belong to the facility; the information
was determined not to be credible,
explain; other, specify).
(z) Combustion equipment at onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
facilities, onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities, and natural gas distribution
facilities. If your facility is required by
§ 98.232(c)(22), (i)(7), or (j)(12) to report
emissions from combustion equipment,
then you must indicate whether your
facility has any combustion units
subject to reporting according to
paragraph (a)(1)(xx), (a)(8)(vi), or
(a)(9)(xiii) of this section. If your facility
contains any combustion units subject
to reporting according to paragraph
(a)(1)(xx), (a)(8)(vi), or (a)(9)(xiii) of this
section, then you must report the
information specified in paragraphs
(z)(1) and (2) of this section, as
applicable. You must report the
information specified in paragraphs
(z)(1) and (2) of this section, as
applicable, for each well-pad (for
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production), gathering and boosting site
(for onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting), or facility (for
all other applicable industry segments).
(1) Indicate whether the combustion
units include: External fuel combustion
units with a rated heat capacity less
than or equal to 5 million Btu per hour;
or, internal fuel combustion units that
are not compressor-drivers, with a rated
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50434
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
heat capacity less than or equal to 1
mmBtu/hr (or the equivalent of 130
horsepower). If the facility contains
external fuel combustion units with a
rated heat capacity less than or equal to
5 million Btu per hour or internal fuel
combustion units that are not
compressor-drivers, with a rated heat
capacity less than or equal to 1 million
Btu per hour (or the equivalent of 130
horsepower), then you must report the
information specified in paragraphs
(z)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section for
each unit type.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).
(ii) The type of combustion unit.
(iii) The total number of combustion
units.
(2) Indicate whether the combustion
units include: External fuel combustion
units with a rated heat capacity greater
than 5 million Btu per hour; internal
fuel combustion units that are not
compressor-drivers, with a rated heat
capacity greater than 1 million Btu per
hour (or the equivalent of 130
horsepower); or, internal fuel
combustion units of any heat capacity
that are compressor-drivers. For each
type of combustion unit at your facility,
you must report the information
specified in paragraphs (z)(2)(i) through
(iv) and (z)(2)(viii) through (x) of this
section, except for internal fuel
combustion units that are not
compressor-drivers, with a rated heat
capacity greater than 1 million Btu per
hour (or the equivalent of 130
horsepower) or internal fuel combustion
units of any heat capacity that are
compressor-drivers that combust natural
gas meeting the criteria in § 98.233(z)(1)
or (2), which must report the
information specified in paragraphs
(z)(2)(i) through (x) of this section.
Information must be reported for each
combustion unit type, fuel type, and
method for determining the CH4
emission factor combination, as
applicable.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).
(ii) The type of combustion unit
including external fuel combustion
units with a rated heat capacity greater
than 5 million Btu per hour; internal
fuel combustion units that are not
compressor-drivers, with a rated heat
capacity greater than 1 million Btu per
hour (or the equivalent of 130
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
horsepower); or internal fuel
combustion units of any heat capacity
that are compressor-drivers.
(iii) The type of fuel combusted.
(iv) The quantity of fuel combusted in
the calendar year, in thousand standard
cubic feet, gallons, or tons.
(v) The equipment type, including
reciprocating 2-stroke-lean burn,
reciprocating 4-stroke lean-burn,
reciprocating 4-stroke rich-burn, and gas
turbine.
(vi) The method used to determine the
methane emission factor, including the
default emission factor from Table W–
7 of subpart W, OEM data, or
performance tests in § 98.234(i).
(vii) The value of the CH4 emission
factor (kg CH4/mmBtu).
(viii) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric
tons CO2, calculated according to
§ 98.233(z)(1) through (3).
(ix) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, calculated according to
§ 98.233(z)(1) through (3).
(x) Annual N2O emissions, in metric
tons N2O, calculated according to
§ 98.233(z)(1) through (3).
(aa) Industry segment-specific
information. Each facility must report
the information specified in paragraphs
(aa)(1) through (11) of this section, for
each applicable industry segment,
determined using a flow meter that
meets the requirements of § 98.234(b)
for quantities that are sent to sale or
through the facility and determined by
using best available data for other
quantities. If a quantity required to be
reported is zero, you must report zero as
the value.
(1) For onshore petroleum and natural
gas production, report the data specified
in paragraphs (aa)(1)(i) and (iv) of this
section.
(i) Report the information specified in
paragraphs (aa)(1)(i)(A) through (D) of
this section for the basin as a whole,
unless otherwise specified.
*
*
*
*
*
(B) The quantity of natural gas
produced from producing wells that is
sent to sale in the calendar year, in
thousand standard cubic feet.
(C) The quantity of crude oil
produced from producing wells that is
sent to sale in the calendar year, in
barrels.
(D) The quantity of condensate
produced from producing wells that is
sent to sale in the calendar year, in
barrels.
(ii) * * *
(D) The number of producing wells at
the end of the calendar year (exclude
only those wells permanently shut-in
and plugged).
(E) The number of producing wells
acquired during the calendar year.
PO 00000
Frm 00154
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(F) The number of producing wells
divested during the calendar year.
(G) The number of wells completed
during the calendar year.
(H) The number of wells permanently
shut-in and plugged during the calendar
year.
*
*
*
*
*
(iii) Report the information specified
in paragraphs (aa)(1)(iii)(A) through (E)
of this section for each well located in
the facility.
(A) Well ID number.
(B) Well-pad ID.
(C) For each well permanently shut-in
and plugged during the calendar year,
the quantity of natural gas produced
that is sent to sale in the calendar year,
in thousand standard cubic feet.
(D) For each well permanently shutin and plugged during the calendar year,
the quantity of crude oil produced that
is sent to sale in the calendar year, in
barrels.
(E) For each well permanently shut-in
and plugged during the calendar year,
the quantity of condensate produced
that is sent to sale in the calendar year,
in barrels.
(iv) Report the information specified
in paragraphs (aa)(1)(iv)(A) through (F)
of this section for each well-pad located
in the facility.
(A) A unique name or ID number for
the well-pad.
(B) Sub-basin ID.
(C) The latitude and longitude of the
well-pad representing the geographic
centroid or center point of the well-pad
in decimal degrees to at least four digits
to the right of the decimal point.
(D) For each well-pad with a well that
was permanently shut-in and plugged
during the calendar year, report the
quantity of gas produced from all
producing wells on the well-pad that is
sent to sale in the calendar year, in
thousand standard cubic feet.
(E) For each well-pad with a well that
was permanently shut-in and plugged
during the calendar year, report the
quantity of crude oil produced from all
producing wells on the well-pad that is
sent to sale in the calendar year for
sales, in barrels.
(F) For each well-pad with a well that
was permanently shut-in and plugged
during the calendar year, report the
quantity of condensate produced from
all producing wells on the well-pad that
is sent to sale in the calendar year, in
barrels.
(2) For offshore production, report the
quantities specified in paragraphs
(aa)(2)(i) through (vi) of this section.
(i) The quantity of natural gas
produced from producing wells that is
sent to sale in the calendar year, in
thousand standard cubic feet.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
(ii) The quantity of crude oil
produced from producing wells that is
sent to sale in the calendar year, in
barrels.
(iii) The quantity of condensate
produced from producing wells that is
sent to sale in the calendar year, in
barrels.
(iv) For each well permanently shutin and plugged during the calendar year,
the quantity of natural gas produced
that is sent to sale in the calendar year,
in thousand standard cubic feet.
(v) For each well permanently shut-in
and plugged during the calendar year,
the quantity of crude oil produced that
is sent to sale in the calendar year, in
barrels.
(vi) For each well permanently shutin and plugged during the calendar year,
the quantity of condensate produced
that is sent to sale in the calendar year,
in barrels.
(3) For natural gas processing, if your
facility fractionates NGLs and also
reports as a supplier to subpart NN of
this part, you must report the
information specified in paragraphs
(aa)(3)(ii) and (aa)(3)(v) through (ix) of
this section. Otherwise, report the
information specified in paragraphs
(aa)(3)(i) through (ix) of this section.
(i) The quantity of natural gas
received at the gas processing plant for
processing in the calendar year, in
thousand standard cubic feet.
*
*
*
*
*
(viii) Indicate whether the facility
reports as a supplier to subpart NN of
this part.
(ix) The quantity of residue gas
leaving that has been processed by the
facility and any gas that passes through
the facility to sales without being
processed by the facility.
(4) * * *
(i) The quantity of natural gas
transported through the compressor
station in the calendar year, in thousand
standard cubic feet.
*
*
*
*
*
(5) * * *
(ii) The quantity of natural gas
withdrawn from storage and sent to sale
in the calendar year, in thousand
standard cubic feet.
*
*
*
*
*
(6) For LNG import equipment, report
the quantity of LNG imported that is
sent to sale in the calendar year, in
thousand standard cubic feet.
(7) For LNG export equipment, report
the quantity of LNG exported that is
sent to sale in the calendar year, in
thousand standard cubic feet.
(8) * * *
(ii) The quantity of LNG withdrawn
from storage and sent to sale in the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
calendar year, in thousand standard
cubic feet.
*
*
*
*
*
(10) For onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities, report the quantities specified
in paragraphs (aa)(10)(i) through (v) of
this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(ii) The quantity of natural gas
transported through the facility to a
downstream endpoint such as a natural
gas processing facility, a natural gas
transmission pipeline, a natural gas
distribution pipeline, a storage facility,
or another gathering and boosting
facility in the calendar year, in thousand
standard cubic feet.
*
*
*
*
*
(iv) The quantity of all hydrocarbon
liquids transported to a downstream
endpoint such as a natural gas
processing facility, a natural gas
transmission pipeline, a natural gas
distribution pipeline, a storage facility,
or another gathering and boosting
facility in the calendar year, in barrels.
(v) Report the information specified in
paragraphs (aa)(10)(v)(A) through (E) of
this section for each gathering and
boosting site located in the facility.
(A) A unique name or ID number for
the gathering and boosting site.
(B) Gathering and boosting site type
(gathering compressor station,
centralized oil production site,
gathering pipeline, or other fence-line
site).
(C) State.
(D) For gathering compressor stations,
centralized oil production sites, and
other fence-line sites, county.
(E) For gathering compressor stations,
centralized oil production sites, and
other fence-line sites, the latitude and
longitude of the gathering and boosting
site representing the geographic
centroid or center point of the site in
decimal degrees to at least four digits to
the right of the decimal point.
(11) * * *
(ii) The quantity of natural gas
withdrawn from underground natural
gas storage and LNG storage
(regasification) facilities owned and
operated by the onshore natural gas
transmission pipeline owner or operator
that are not subject to this subpart in the
calendar year, in thousand standard
cubic feet.
(iii) The quantity of natural gas added
to underground natural gas storage and
LNG storage (liquefied) facilities owned
and operated by the onshore natural gas
transmission pipeline owner or operator
that are not subject to this subpart in the
calendar year, in thousand standard
cubic feet.
PO 00000
Frm 00155
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50435
(iv) The quantity of natural gas
transported through the facility and
transferred to third parties such as LDCs
or other transmission pipelines, in
thousand standard cubic feet.
*
*
*
*
*
(bb) Missing data. For any missing
data procedures used, report the
information in § 98.3(c)(8) and the
procedures used to substitute an
unavailable value of a parameter, except
as provided in paragraphs (bb)(1) and
(2) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
(cc) Delay in reporting for wildcat
wells and delineation wells. If you elect
to delay reporting the information in
paragraph (g)(5)(i) or (ii), (g)(5)(iii)(A) or
(B), (h)(1)(iv), (h)(2)(iv), (j)(1)(iii),
(j)(2)(i)(A), (l)(1)(v), (l)(2)(v), (l)(3)(iv),
(l)(4)(iv), or (m)(5) or (6) of this section,
you must report the information
required in that paragraph no later than
the date 2 years following the date
specified in § 98.3(b) introductory text.
(dd) Drilling mud degassing. You
must indicate whether there were mud
degassing operations at your facility,
and if so, which methods (as specified
in § 98.233(dd)) were used to calculate
emissions. For wells for which your
facility performed mud degassing
operations and used Calculation Method
1, then you must report the information
specified in paragraph (dd)(1) of this
section. For wells for which your
facility performed mud degassing
operations and used Calculation Method
2, then you must report the information
specified in paragraph (dd)(2) of this
section.
(1) For each well for which you used
Calculation Method 1 to calculate
natural gas emissions from mud
degassing, report the information
specified in paragraphs (dd)(1)(i)
through (vii) of this section.
(i) Well ID number.
(ii) Approximate total depth below
surface, in feet.
(iii) Total time that drilling mud is
circulated in the well, in minutes.
(iv) The composition of the drilling
mud: water-based, oil-based, or
synthetic.
(v) If the well is not a representative
well, Well ID number of the
representative well used to derive the
CH4 emission rate used to calculate CH4
emissions for this well.
(vi) If the well is a representative well,
report the information specified in
paragraphs (dd)(1)(vi)(A) through (D) of
this section.
(A) Average mud rate, in gallons per
minute.
(B) Concentration of natural gas in the
drilling mud (Xn in Equation W–41), in
parts per million.
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
50436
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
(C) Measured mole fraction for CH4 in
natural gas entrained in the drilling
mud (GHGCH4 in Equation W–41).
(D) Calculated CH4 emissions rate in
standard cubic per minute (ERs,CH4,r in
Equation W–42).
(vii) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, from well drilling mud
degassing, calculated according to
§ 98.233(dd)(1).
(2) For each well for which you used
Calculation Method 2 to calculate
natural gas emissions from mud
degassing, report the information
specified in paragraphs (dd)(2)(i)
through (iv) of this section.
(i) Well ID number.
(ii) Total number of drilling days.
(iii) The composition of the drilling
mud: water-based, oil-based, or
synthetic.
(iv) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, from drilling mud degassing,
calculated according to § 98.233(dd)(2).
(ee) Crankcase vents. You must
indicate whether your facility performs
any crankcase venting from
reciprocating internal combustion
engines or gas turbines. If your facility
contains at least one crankcase vent on
an applicable engine, you must report
the information specified in paragraphs
(ee)(1) through (4) of this section for
each well-pad (for onshore petroleum
and natural gas production), gathering
and boosting site (for onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting),
or facility (for all other applicable
industry segments).
(1) Well-pad ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production
industry segment only) or gathering and
boosting site ID (for the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segment only).
(2) Total number of crankcase vents at
the well-pad, gathering and boosting
site, or facility, as applicable (‘‘Count’’
in Equation W–45 of this subpart).
(3) Average estimated time that the
reciprocating internal combustion
engines or gas turbines with crankcase
venting were operational in the calendar
year, in hours (‘‘T’’ in Equation W–45 of
this subpart).
(4) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric
tons CH4, calculated according to
§ 98.233(ee)(1).
■ 16. Amend § 98.238 by:
■ a. Removing the definition for ‘‘Acid
gas removal vent emissions’’ and adding
the definition for ‘‘Acid gas removal
unit (AGR) vent emissions’’ in
alphabetical order;
■ b. Adding definitions for
‘‘Atmospheric pressure storage tank,’’
‘‘Automated liquids unloading,’’ and
‘‘Centralized oil production site’’ in
alphabetical order;
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
c. Revising the definitions for
‘‘Compressor mode’’ and ‘‘Compressor
source’’;
■ d. Adding definitions for ‘‘Crankcase
venting,’’ ‘‘Drilling mud,’’ and ‘‘Drilling
mud degassing’’ in alphabetical order;
■ e. Removing the second definition for
‘‘Facility with respect to natural gas
distribution for purposes of reporting
under this subpart and for the
corresponding subpart A requirements’’;
■ f. Revising the definitions for ‘‘Flare
stack emissions’’ and ‘‘Forced extraction
of natural gas liquids’’;
■ g. Adding the definition for
‘‘Gathering and boosting site’’ in
alphabetical order;
■ h. Revising the definitions for
‘‘Gathering and boosting system’’ and
‘‘Gathering and boosting system owner
or operator’’; and
■ i. Adding definitions for ‘‘Gathering
compressor station,’’ ‘‘Gathering
pipeline site,’’ ‘‘In vacuum service,’’
‘‘Manual liquids unloading,’’ ‘‘Mud
rate,’’ ‘‘Nitrogen removal unit (NRU),’’
‘‘Nitrogen removal unit vent emissions,’’
‘‘Other large release event,’’ ‘‘Produced
water,’’ ‘‘Routed to combustion,’’ ‘‘Well
blowout,’’ and ‘‘Well release’’ in
alphabetical order.
The additions and revisions read as
follows:
■
§ 98.238
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Acid gas removal unit (AGR) vent
emissions mean the acid gas separated
from the acid gas absorbing medium
(e.g., an amine solution) and released
with methane and other light
hydrocarbons to the atmosphere or a
flare.
*
*
*
*
*
Atmospheric pressure storage tank
means a vessel (excluding sumps)
operating at atmospheric pressure that is
designed to contain an accumulation of
crude oil, condensate, intermediate
hydrocarbon liquids, or produced water
and that is constructed entirely of nonearthen materials (e.g., wood, concrete,
steel, plastic) that provide structural
support. Atmospheric pressure storage
tanks include both fixed roof tanks and
floating roof tanks. Floating roof tanks
include tanks with either an internal
floating roof or an external floating roof.
Automated liquids unloading means
an unloading that is performed without
manual interference. Examples of
automated liquids unloadings include a
timing and/or pressure device used to
optimize intermittent shut-in of the well
before liquids choke off gas flow or to
open and close valves, continually
operating equipment that does not
require presence of an operator such as
rod pumping units, automated and
PO 00000
Frm 00156
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
unmanned plunger lifts, or other
unloading activities that do not entail a
physical presence at the well-pad.
*
*
*
*
*
Centralized oil production site means
any permanent combination of one or
more hydrocarbon liquids storage tanks
located on one or more contiguous or
adjacent properties that does not also
contain a permanent combination of one
or more compressors that are part of the
onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facility that
gathers hydrocarbon liquids from
multiple well-pads. A centralized oil
production site is a type of gathering
and boosting site for purposes of
reporting under § 98.236.
*
*
*
*
*
Compressor mode means the
operational and pressurized status of a
compressor. For both centrifugal
compressors and reciprocating
compressors, ‘‘mode’’ refers to either:
Operating-mode, standby-pressurizedmode, or not-operating-depressurizedmode.
Compressor source means the source
of certain venting or leaking emissions
from a centrifugal or reciprocating
compressor. For centrifugal
compressors, ‘‘source’’ refers to
blowdown valve leakage through the
blowdown vent, unit isolation valve
leakage through an open blowdown vent
without blind flanges, wet seal oil
degassing vents, and dry seal vents. For
reciprocating compressors, ‘‘source’’
refers to blowdown valve leakage
through the blowdown vent, unit
isolation valve leakage through an open
blowdown vent without blind flanges,
and rod packing emissions.
*
*
*
*
*
Crankcase venting means the process
of venting or removing blow-by from the
void spaces of an internal combustion
engine outside of the combustion
cylinders to prevent excessive pressure
build-up within the engine. This does
not include ingestive systems that vent
blow-by into the engine where it is
returned to the combustion process.
*
*
*
*
*
Drilling mud means a mixture of clays
and additives with water, oil, or
synthetic materials. While drilling, the
drilling mud is continuously pumped
through the drill string and out the bit
to cool and lubricate the drill bit, and
move cuttings through the wellbore to
the surface.
Drilling mud degassing means the
practice of safely removing pockets of
free gas entrained in the drilling mud
once it is outside of the wellbore.
*
*
*
*
*
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
Flare stack emissions means CO2 in
gas routed to a flare, CO2 from partial
combustion of hydrocarbons in gas
routed to a flare, CH4 emissions
resulting from the incomplete
combustion of hydrocarbons in gas
routed to a flare, and N2O resulting from
operation of a flare.
Forced extraction of natural gas
liquids means removal of ethane or
higher carbon number hydrocarbons
existing in the vapor phase in natural
gas, by removing ethane or heavier
hydrocarbons derived from natural gas
into natural gas liquids by means of a
forced extraction process. Forced
extraction processes include but are not
limited to refrigeration, absorption (lean
oil), cryogenic expander, and
combinations of these processes. Forced
extraction does not include in and of
itself; natural gas dehydration, the
collection or gravity separation of water
or hydrocarbon liquids from natural gas
at ambient temperature or heated above
ambient temperatures, the condensation
of water or hydrocarbon liquids through
passive reduction in pressure or
temperature, a Joule-Thomson valve, a
dew point depression valve, or an
isolated or standalone Joule-Thomson
skid.
Gathering and boosting site means a
single gathering compressor station as
defined in this section, centralized oil
production site as defined in this
section, gathering pipeline site as
defined in this section, or other fenceline site within the onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment.
Gathering and boosting system means
a single network of pipelines,
compressors and process equipment,
including equipment to perform natural
gas compression, dehydration, and acid
gas removal, that has one or more
connection points to gas and oil
production or one or more other
gathering and boosting systems and a
downstream endpoint, typically a gas
processing plant, transmission pipeline,
LDC pipeline, or other gathering and
boosting system.
Gathering and boosting system owner
or operator means any person that holds
a contract in which they agree to
transport petroleum or natural gas from
one or more onshore petroleum and
natural gas production wells or one or
more other gathering and boosting
systems to a natural gas processing
facility, another gathering and boosting
system, a natural gas transmission
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
pipeline, or a distribution pipeline, or
any person responsible for custody of
the petroleum or natural gas
transported.
Gathering compressor station means
any permanent combination of one or
more compressors located on one or
more contiguous or adjacent properties
that are part of the onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting
facility that move natural gas at
increased pressure through gathering
pipelines or into or out of storage. A
gathering compressor station is a type of
gathering and boosting site for purposes
of reporting under § 98.236.
Gathering pipeline site means all of
the gathering pipelines within a single
state. A gathering pipeline site is a type
of gathering and boosting site for
purposes of reporting under § 98.236.
*
*
*
*
*
In vacuum service means equipment
operating at an internal pressure which
is at least 5 kilopascals (kPa) (0.7 psia)
below ambient pressure.
*
*
*
*
*
Manual liquids unloading means an
unloading when field personnel attend
to the well at the well-pad, for example
to manually plunge a well at the site
using a rig or other method, to open a
valve to direct flow to an atmospheric
tank to clear the well, or to manually
shut-in the well to allow pressure to
build in the well-bore. Manual
unloadings may be performed on a
routine schedule or on ‘‘as needed’’
basis.
*
*
*
*
*
Mud rate means the pumping rate of
the mud by the mud pumps, usually
measured in gallons per minute (gpm).
*
*
*
*
*
Nitrogen removal unit (NRU) means a
process unit that separates nitrogen
from natural gas using various
separation processes (e.g., cryogenic
units, membrane units, etc.)
Nitrogen removal unit vent emissions
means the nitrogen gas separated from
the natural gas and released with
methane and other gases to the
atmosphere, flare, or other combustion
unit.
*
*
*
*
*
Other large release event means any
planned or unplanned uncontrolled
release to the atmosphere of gas, liquids,
or mixture thereof, from wells and/or
other equipment that result in emissions
for which there are no methodologies in
§ 98.233 other than under § 98.233(y) to
PO 00000
Frm 00157
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
50437
appropriately estimate these emissions.
Other large release events include, but
are not limited to, well blowouts, well
releases, pressure relief valve releases
from process equipment other than
hydrocarbon liquids storage tanks,
storage tank cleaning and other
maintenance activities, and releases that
occur as a result of an accident,
equipment rupture, fire, or explosion.
Other large release events also include
failure of equipment or equipment
components such that a single
equipment leak or release has emissions
that exceed the emissions calculated for
that source using applicable methods in
§ 98.233(a) through (s), (w), (x), (dd), or
(ee) by the threshold in
§ 98.233(y)(1)(ii).
*
*
*
*
*
Produced water means the water
(brine) brought up from the
hydrocarbon-bearing strata during the
extraction of oil and gas, and can
include formation water, injection
water, and any chemicals added
downhole or during the oil/water
separation process.
*
*
*
*
*
Routed to combustion means, for
onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facilities, natural gas
distribution facilities, and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities, that emissions are
routed to stationary or portable fuel
combustion equipment specified in
§ 98.232(c)(22), (i)(7), or (j)(12), as
applicable. For all other industry
segments in this subpart, routed to
combustion means that emissions are
routed to a stationary fuel combustion
unit subject to subpart C of this part
(General Stationary Fuel Combustion
Sources).
*
*
*
*
*
Well blowout means a complete loss
of well control for a long duration of
time resulting in an emissions release.
*
*
*
*
*
Well release means a short duration of
uncontrolled emissions release from a
well followed by a period of controlled
emissions release in which control
techniques were successfully
implemented.
*
*
*
*
*
17. Remove table W–1A, table W–1B,
table W–1C, table W–1D, and table W–
1E to subpart W of part 98 and add table
W–1 to subpart W of part 98 in
numerical order to read as follows:
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
50438
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
TABLE W–1 TO SUBPART W OF PART 98—DEFAULT WHOLE GAS POPULATION EMISSION FACTORS
Industry segment
Emission factor
(scf whole gas/
hour/unit)
Source type/component
Population Emission Factors—Pneumatic Device Vents and Pneumatic Pumps, Gas Service 1
• Onshore petroleum and natural gas production ..................
• Onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
•
•
•
•
Onshore natural gas processing ..........................................
Onshore natural gas transmission compression .................
Underground natural gas storage ........................................
Natural gas distribution
Continuous Low Bleed Pneumatic Device Vents 2 .................
Continuous High Bleed Pneumatic Device Vents 2 ................
6.8
21
Pneumatic Pumps 3 .................................................................
Continuous Low Bleed Pneumatic Device Vents 2 .................
Continuous High Bleed Pneumatic Device Vents 2 ................
13.3
6.8
30
Population Emission Factors—Major Equipment, Gas Service 1
• Onshore petroleum and natural gas production ..................
• Onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting.
Wellhead ..................................................................................
Separator .................................................................................
Meters/Piping ...........................................................................
Compressor .............................................................................
Dehydrator ...............................................................................
Heater ......................................................................................
Storage Vessel ........................................................................
8.87
9.65
7.04
13.8
8.09
5.22
1.83
Population Emission Factors—Major Equipment, Crude Service
Onshore petroleum and natural gas production ......................
Wellhead ..................................................................................
Separator .................................................................................
Meters/Piping ...........................................................................
Compressor .............................................................................
Dehydrator ...............................................................................
Heater ......................................................................................
Storage Vessel ........................................................................
4.13
4.77
12.4
13.8
8.09
3.2
1.91
Population Emission Factors—Gathering Pipelines, by Material Type 4
Onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
Protected Steel ........................................................................
Unprotected Steel ....................................................................
Plastic/Composite ....................................................................
Cast Iron ..................................................................................
0.93
8.2
0.28
8.4
1 For
multi-phase flow that includes gas, use the gas service emission factors.
factor is in units of ‘‘scf whole gas/hour/device.’’
3 Emission factor is in units of ‘‘scf whole gas/hour/pump.’’
4 Emission factors are in units of ‘‘scf whole gas/hour/mile of pipeline.’’
2 Emission
18. Revise table W–2 to subpart W of
part 98 to read as follows:
■
TABLE W–2 TO SUBPART W OF PART 98—DEFAULT WHOLE GAS LEAKER EMISSION FACTORS
Emission factor (scf whole gas/hour/component)
Equipment components
If you survey using
Method 21 as specified
in § 98.234(a)(2)(i)
If you survey using
Method 21 as specified
in § 98.234(a)(2)(ii)
If you survey using any
of the methods in
§ 98.234(a)(1), (3), or (5)
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Leaker Emission Factors—Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and
Boosting—All Components, Gas Service 1
Valve ............................................................................................
Flange ..........................................................................................
Connector (other) .........................................................................
Open-Ended Line 2 ......................................................................
Pressure Relief Valve ..................................................................
Pump Seal ...................................................................................
Other 3 ..........................................................................................
9.6
6.9
4.9
6.3
7.8
14
9.1
5.5
4.0
2.8
3.6
4.5
8.3
5.3
16
11
7.9
10
13
23
15
Leaker Emission Factors—Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production—All Components, Oil Service
Valve ............................................................................................
Flange ..........................................................................................
Connector (other) .........................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:01 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00158
5.6
2.7
5.6
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
3.3
1.6
3.2
01AUP2
9.2
4.4
9.1
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
50439
TABLE W–2 TO SUBPART W OF PART 98—DEFAULT WHOLE GAS LEAKER EMISSION FACTORS—Continued
Emission factor (scf whole gas/hour/component)
Equipment components
If you survey using
Method 21 as specified
in § 98.234(a)(2)(i)
Open-Ended Line .........................................................................
Pump 4 .........................................................................................
Other 3 ..........................................................................................
If you survey using
Method 21 as specified
in § 98.234(a)(2)(ii)
1.6
3.7
2.2
If you survey using any
of the methods in
§ 98.234(a)(1), (3), or (5)
0.93
2.2
1.0
2.6
6.0
2.9
1 For
multi-phase flow that includes gas, use the gas service emission factors.
open-ended lines component type includes blowdown valve and isolation valve leaks emitted through the blowdown vent stack for centrifugal and reciprocating compressors.
3 ‘‘Others’’ category includes any equipment leak emission point not specifically listed in this table, as specified in § 98.232(c)(21) and (j)(10).
4 The pumps component type in oil service includes agitator seals.
2 The
19. Remove table W–3A and table W–
3B to subpart W of part 98 and add table
■
W–3 to subpart W of part 98 in
numerical order to read as follows:
TABLE W–3 TO SUBPART W OF PART 98—DEFAULT TOTAL HYDROCARBON POPULATION EMISSION FACTORS
Industry segment
Emission factor
(scf total hydrocarbon/
hour/component)
Source type/component
Population Emission Factors—Storage Wellheads, Gas Service
Underground natural gas storage ...................................
20. Remove table W–4A and table W–
4B to subpart W of part 98 and add table
■
Connector .......................................................................
Valve ...............................................................................
Pressure Relief Valve .....................................................
Open-Ended Line ...........................................................
0.01
0.1
0.17
0.03
W–4 to subpart W of part 98 in
numerical order to read as follows:
TABLE W–4 TO SUBPART W OF PART 98—DEFAULT TOTAL HYDROCARBON LEAKER EMISSION FACTORS
Emission factor (scf total hydrocarbon/hour/component)
If you survey using
Method 21 as
specified in
§ 98.234(a)(2)(i)
Equipment components
If you survey using
Method 21 as
specified in
§ 98.234(a)(2)(ii)
If you survey using
any of the methods in
§ 98.234(a)(1), (3), or (5)
Leaker Emission Factors—Onshore Natural Gas Processing, Onshore Natural Gas Transmission Compression—Compressor
Components, Gas Service
Valve 1 ..........................................................................................
Connector ....................................................................................
Open-Ended Line .........................................................................
Pressure Relief Valve ..................................................................
Meter ............................................................................................
Other 2 ..........................................................................................
14.84
5.59
17.27
39.66
19.33
4.1
9.51
3.58
11.07
25.42
12.39
2.63
24.2
9.13
28.2
64.8
31.6
6.70
Leaker Emission Factors—Onshore Natural Gas Processing, Onshore Natural Gas Transmission Compression—Non-Compressor
Components, Gas Service
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Valve 1 ..........................................................................................
Connector ....................................................................................
Open-Ended Line .........................................................................
Pressure Relief Valve ..................................................................
Meter ............................................................................................
Other 2 ..........................................................................................
6.42
5.71
11.27
2.01
2.93
4.1
4.12
3.66
7.22
1.29
1.88
2.63
10.5
9.3
18.4
3.28
4.79
6.70
Leaker Emission Factors—Underground Natural Gas Storage—Storage Station, Gas Service
Valve 1 ..........................................................................................
Connector (other) .........................................................................
Open-Ended Line .........................................................................
Pressure Relief Valve ..................................................................
Meter and Instrument ..................................................................
Other 2 ..........................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00159
14.84
5.59
17.27
39.66
19.33
4.1
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
9.51
3.58
11.07
25.42
12.39
2.63
01AUP2
24.2
9.13
28.2
64.8
31.6
6.70
50440
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
TABLE W–4 TO SUBPART W OF PART 98—DEFAULT TOTAL HYDROCARBON LEAKER EMISSION FACTORS—Continued
Emission factor (scf total hydrocarbon/hour/component)
If you survey using
Method 21 as
specified in
§ 98.234(a)(2)(i)
Equipment components
If you survey using
Method 21 as
specified in
§ 98.234(a)(2)(ii)
If you survey using
any of the methods in
§ 98.234(a)(1), (3), or (5)
Leaker Emission Factors—Underground Natural Gas Storage—Storage Wellheads, Gas Service
Valve1
..........................................................................................
Connector (other than flanges) ....................................................
Flange ..........................................................................................
Open-Ended Line .........................................................................
Pressure Relief Valve ..................................................................
Other 2 ..........................................................................................
4.5
1.2
3.8
2.5
4.1
4.1
3.2
0.7
2.0
1.7
2.5
2.5
7.35
1.96
6.21
4.08
6.70
6.70
1 Valves
include control valves, block valves and regulator valves.
includes any potential equipment leak emission point in gas service that is not specifically listed in this table, as specified in
§ 98.232(e)(8) for onshore natural gas transmission compression, and as specified in § 98.232(f)(6) and (8) for underground natural gas storage.
2 Other
21. Remove table W–5A and table W–
5B to subpart W of part 98 and add table
■
W–5 to subpart W of part 98 in
numerical order to read as follows:
TABLE W–5 TO SUBPART W OF PART 98—DEFAULT METHANE POPULATION EMISSION FACTORS
Industry segment
Emission factor
(scf methane/hour/
component)
Source type/component
Population Emission Factors—LNG Storage Compressor, Gas Service
LNG storage ..........................................................................
LNG import and export equipment ........................................
Vapor Recovery Compressor 1 ............................................
4.17
Population Emission Factors—Below Grade Transmission-Distribution Transfer Station Components and Below Grade MeteringRegulating Station 2 Components, Gas Service 3
Natural gas distribution .........................................................
Below Grade T–D Transfer Station .....................................
Below Grade M&R Station ..................................................
0.30
0.30
Population Emission Factors—Distribution Mains, Gas Service 4
Natural gas distribution .........................................................
Unprotected Steel ................................................................
Protected Steel ....................................................................
Plastic ..................................................................................
Cast Iron ..............................................................................
5.1
0.57
0.17
6.9
Population Emission Factors—Distribution Services, Gas Service 5
Natural gas distribution .........................................................
Unprotected Steel ................................................................
Protected Steel ....................................................................
Plastic ..................................................................................
Copper .................................................................................
0.086
0.0077
0.0016
0.03
Population Emission Factors—Interconnect, Direct Sale, or Farm Tap Station Stations 2 3
Onshore natural gas transmission pipeline ...........................
Transmission Company Interconnect M&R Station ............
Direct Sale or Farm Tap Station .........................................
166
1.3
Population Emission Factors—Transmission Pipelines, Gas Service 4
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
Onshore natural gas transmission pipeline ...........................
1 Emission
Factor is in units of
customer meters.
3 Emission Factor is in units of
4 Emission Factor is in units of
5 Emission Factor is in units of
Unprotected Steel ................................................................
Protected Steel ....................................................................
Plastic ..................................................................................
Cast Iron ..............................................................................
‘‘scf methane/hour/compressor.’’
2 Excluding
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
‘‘scf methane/hour/station.’’
‘‘scf methane/hour/mile.’’
‘‘scf methane/hour/number of services.’’
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00160
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
0.74
0.041
0.061
27
50441
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 / Proposed Rules
22. Remove table W–6A and table W–
6B to subpart W of part 98 and add table
■
W–6 to subpart W of part 98 in
numerical order to read as follows:
TABLE W–6 TO SUBPART W OF PART 98—DEFAULT METHANE LEAKER EMISSION FACTORS
Emission factor (scf methane/hour/component)
If you survey using
Method 21 as
specified in
§ 98.234(a)(2)(i)
Equipment components
If you survey using
Method 21 as
specified in
§ 98.234(a)(2)(ii)
If you survey using
any of the methods in
§ 98.234(a)(1), (3), or (5)
Leaker Emission Factors—LNG Storage and LNG Import and Export Equipment—Storage Components and Terminals Components,
LNG Service
Valve ............................................................................................
Pump Seal ...................................................................................
Connector ....................................................................................
Other 1 ..........................................................................................
1.19
4.00
0.34
1.77
0.23
0.73
0.11
0.99
1.94
6.54
0.56
2.9
Leaker Emission Factors—LNG Storage and LNG Import and Export Equipment—Storage Components and Terminals Components,
Gas Service
Valve 2 ..........................................................................................
Connector ....................................................................................
Open-Ended Line .........................................................................
Pressure Relief Valve ..................................................................
Meter and Instrument ..................................................................
Other 3 ..........................................................................................
14.84
5.59
17.27
39.66
19.33
4.1
9.51
3.58
11.07
25.42
12.39
2.63
24.2
9.13
28.2
64.8
31.6
6.70
Leaker Emission Factors—Natural Gas Distribution—Transmission-Distribution Transfer Station 4 Components, Gas Service
Connector ....................................................................................
Block Valve ..................................................................................
Control Valve ...............................................................................
Pressure Relief Valve ..................................................................
Orifice Meter ................................................................................
Regulator .....................................................................................
Open-ended Line .........................................................................
1.69
0.557
9.34
0.27
0.212
0.772
26.131
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
2.76
0.91
15.3
0.44
0.35
1.26
42.7
1 ‘‘Other’’
equipment type for components in LNG service should be applied for any equipment type other than connectors, pumps, or valves.
include control valves, block valves and regulator valves.
equipment type for components in gas service should be applied for any equipment type other than valves, connectors, flanges,
open-ended lines, pressure relief valves, and meters and instruments, as specified in § 98.232(g)(6) and (7) and § 98.232(h)(7) and (8).
4 Excluding customer meters.
2 Valves
3 ‘‘Other’’
23. Revise table W–7 to subpart W of
part 98 to read as follows:
■
TABLE W–7 TO SUBPART W OF PART 98—DEFAULT METHANE EMISSION FACTORS FOR INTERNAL COMBUSTION
EQUIPMENT
Emission factor
(kg CH4/mmBtu)
Internal combustion equipment type
Reciprocating Engine, 2-stroke lean-burn ...................................................................................................................................
Reciprocating Engine, 4-stroke lean-burn ...................................................................................................................................
Reciprocating Engine, 4-stroke rich-burn ....................................................................................................................................
Gas Turbine .................................................................................................................................................................................
[FR Doc. 2023–14338 Filed 7–31–23; 8:45 am]
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS2
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
19:22 Jul 31, 2023
Jkt 259001
PO 00000
Frm 00161
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\01AUP2.SGM
01AUP2
0.658
0.522
0.045
0.004
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 146 (Tuesday, August 1, 2023)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 50282-50441]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-14338]
[[Page 50281]]
Vol. 88
Tuesday,
No. 146
August 1, 2023
Part II
Environmental Protection Agency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
40 CFR Part 98
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: Revisions and Confidentiality
Determinations for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 146 / Tuesday, August 1, 2023 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 50282]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 98
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234; FRL-10246-01-OAR]
RIN 2060-AV83
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: Revisions and Confidentiality
Determinations for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
amend requirements that apply to the petroleum and natural gas systems
source category of the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule to ensure that
reporting is based on empirical data, accurately reflects total methane
emissions and waste emissions from applicable facilities, and allows
owners and operators of applicable facilities to submit empirical
emissions data that appropriately demonstrate the extent to which a
charge is owed. The EPA is also proposing changes to requirements that
apply to the general provisions, general stationary fuel combustion,
and petroleum and natural gas systems source categories of the
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule to improve calculation, monitoring, and
reporting of greenhouse gas data for petroleum and natural gas systems
facilities. This action also proposes to establish and amend
confidentiality determinations for the reporting of certain data
elements to be added or substantially revised in these proposed
amendments.
DATES: Comments. Comments must be received on or before October 2,
2023. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), comments on the
information collection provisions are best assured of consideration if
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) receives a copy of your
comments on or before August 31, 2023.
Public hearing. The EPA does not plan to conduct a public hearing
unless requested. If anyone contacts us requesting a public hearing on
or before August 7, 2023, we will hold a virtual public hearing. See
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for information on requesting and registering
for a public hearing.
ADDRESSES: Comments. You may submit comments, identified by Docket Id.
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234, by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal. www.regulations.gov (our preferred
method). Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center, Air
and Radiation Docket, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20460.
Hand Delivery or Courier (by scheduled appointment only): EPA
Docket Center, WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20004. The Docket Center's hours of operations are
8:30 a.m.-4:30 p.m., Monday-Friday (except Federal holidays).
Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket Id.
No. for this proposed rulemaking. Comments received may be posted
without change to www.regulations.gov/, including any personal
information provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the ``Public
Participation'' heading of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
The virtual hearing, if requested, will be held using an online
meeting platform, and the EPA will provide information on its website
(www.epa.gov/ghgreporting) regarding how to register and access the
hearing. Refer to the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for additional
information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jennifer Bohman, Climate Change
Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs (MC-6207A), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number: (202) 343-9548; email address: [email protected].
For technical information, please go to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Program (GHGRP) website, www.epa.gov/ghgreporting. To submit a
question, select Help Center, followed by ``Contact Us.''
World Wide Web (WWW). In addition to being available in the docket,
an electronic copy of this proposal will also be available through the
WWW. Following the Administrator's signature, a copy of this proposed
rule will be posted on the EPA's GHGRP website at www.epa.gov/ghgreporting.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Written comments. Submit your comments, identified by Docket Id.
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234, at www.regulations.gov (our preferred
method), or the other methods identified in the ADDRESSES section. Once
submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from the docket. The
EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not
submit to the EPA's docket at www.regulations.gov any information you
consider to be confidential business information (CBI), proprietary
business information (PBI), or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must
be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered
the official comment and should include discussion of all points you
wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). Commenters who would like the EPA
to further consider in this rulemaking any relevant comments that they
provided on the 2022 Proposed Rule regarding proposed revisions at
issue in this proposal must resubmit those comments to the EPA during
this proposal's comment period. Please visit www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets for additional submission methods; the full EPA
public comment policy; information about CBI, PBI, or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments.
Participation in virtual public hearing. To request a virtual
public hearing, please contact the person listed in the following FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section by August 7, 2023. If requested,
the virtual hearing will be held on August 21, 2023. The EPA will
provide further information about the hearing on its website
(www.epa.gov/ghgreporting) if a hearing is requested.
If a public hearing is requested, the EPA will begin pre-
registering speakers for the hearing no later than one business day
after a request has been received. To register to speak at the virtual
hearing, please use the online registration form available at
www.epa.gov/ghgreporting or contact us by email at
[email protected]. The last day to pre-register to speak at the
hearing will be August 16, 2023. On August 18, 2023, the EPA will post
a general agenda that will list pre-registered speakers in approximate
order at: www.epa.gov/ghgreporting.
The EPA will make every effort to follow the schedule as closely as
possible on the day of the hearing; however, please plan for the
hearings to run either ahead of schedule or behind schedule.
Each commenter will have 4 minutes to provide oral testimony. The
EPA encourages commenters to provide the EPA with a copy of their oral
testimony
[[Page 50283]]
electronically (via email) by emailing it to [email protected]. The
EPA also recommends submitting the text of your oral testimony as
written comments to the rulemaking docket.
The EPA may ask clarifying questions during the oral presentations
but will not respond to the presentations at that time. Written
statements and supporting information submitted during the comment
period will be considered with the same weight as oral testimony and
supporting information presented at the public hearing.
Please note that any updates made to any aspect of the hearing will
be posted online at www.epa.gov/ghgreporting. While the EPA expects the
hearing to go forward as set forth above, please monitor our website or
contact us by email at [email protected] to determine if there are
any updates. The EPA does not intend to publish a document in the
Federal Register announcing updates.
If you require the services of an interpreter or special
accommodation such as audio description, please pre-register for the
hearing with the public hearing team and describe your needs by August
8, 2023. The EPA may not be able to arrange accommodations without
advanced notice.
Regulated entities. This is a proposed regulation. If finalized,
these proposed revisions would affect certain entities that must submit
annual greenhouse gas (GHG) reports under the GHGRP (40 CFR part 98).
These are proposed amendments to existing regulations. If finalized,
these amended regulations would also affect owners or operators of
petroleum and natural gas systems that directly emit GHGs. Regulated
categories and entities include, but are not limited to, those listed
in Table 1 of this preamble:
Table 1--Examples of Affected Entities by Category
------------------------------------------------------------------------
North American
Industry Examples of
Category Classification affected facilities
System (NAICS)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems 486210 Pipeline
transportation of
natural gas.
221210 Natural gas
distribution
facilities.
211120 Crude petroleum
extraction.
211130 Natural gas
extraction.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 1 of this preamble is not intended to be exhaustive, but
rather provides a guide for readers regarding facilities likely to be
affected by this proposed action. This table lists the types of
facilities that the EPA is now aware could potentially be affected by
this action. Other types of facilities than those listed in the table
could also be subject to reporting requirements. To determine whether
you would be affected by this proposed action, you should carefully
examine the applicability criteria found in 40 CFR part 98, subpart A
(General Provisions) and 40 CFR part 98, subpart W (Petroleum and
Natural Gas Systems). If you have questions regarding the applicability
of this action to a particular facility, consult the person listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
Acronyms and Abbreviations. The following acronyms and
abbreviations are used in this document.
AGR acid gas removal unit
AMLD Advanced Mobile Leak Detection
API American Petroleum Institute
ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials
BOEM Bureau of Ocean Energy Management
BRE Bryan Research & Engineering
Btu/scf British thermal units per standard cubic foot
CAA Clean Air Act
CBI confidential business information
CEMS continuous emissions monitoring system
CenSARA Central States Air Resources Agency
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CH4 methane
CO2 carbon dioxide
CO2e carbon dioxide equivalent
CRR cost-to-revenue ratio
e-GGRT electronic Greenhouse Gas Reporting Tool
EG emission guidelines
EIA U.S. Energy Information Administration
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ET Eastern time
FAQ frequently asked question
FLIGHT Facility Level Information on Greenhouse gases Tool
FR Federal Register
GHG greenhouse gas
GHGRP Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program
GOR gas to oil ratio
gpm gallons per minute
GRI Gas Research Institute
GT gas turbines
HHV higher heating value
ICR Information Collection Request
ID identification
IRA Inflation Reduction Act of 2022
ISBN International Standard Book Number
IVT Inputs Verification Tool
kg/hr kilograms per hour
LDC local distribution company
LNG liquefied natural gas
m meters
MDEA methyl diethanolamine
MEA monoethanolamine
MMBtu/hr million British thermal units per hour
MMscf million standard cubic feet
mt metric tons
mtCO2e metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent
N2O nitrous oxide
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NGLs natural gas liquids
NMAC New Mexico Administrative Code
NSPS new source performance standards
O&M operation and maintenance
OCS AQS Outer Continental Shelf Air Quality System
OEM original equipment manufacturer
OGI optical gas imaging
OMB Office of Management and Budget
PBI proprietary business information
ppm parts per million
ppmv parts per million by volume
PRA Paperwork Reduction Act
psig pounds per square inch gauge
REC reduced emission completion
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
RFI Request for Information
RICE reciprocating internal combustion engines
RY reporting year
scf standard cubic feet
scf/hr/device standard cubic feet per hour per device
THC total hydrocarbon
TSD technical support document
U.S. United States
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
VOC volatile organic compound(s)
WWW World Wide Web
Contents
I. Background
A. How is this preamble organized?
B. Executive Summary
C. Background on This Proposed Rule
D. Legal Authority
E. Relationship to Other Clean Air Act Section 136 Actions
[[Page 50284]]
II. Overview and Rationale for Proposed Amendments to 40 CFR Part
98, subpart W
A. Revisions To Address Potential Gaps in Reporting of Emissions
Data for Specific Sectors
B. Revisions To Add New Emissions Calculation Methodologies or
Improve Existing Emissions Calculation Methodologies
C. Revisions To Reporting Requirements to Improve Verification
and Transparency of the Data Collected
D. Technical Amendments, Clarifications, and Corrections
III. Proposed Amendments to Part 98
A. General and Applicability Amendments
B. Other Large Release Events
C. New and Additional Emission Sources
D. Reporting for the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and
Boosting Industry Segments
E. Natural Gas Pneumatic Device Venting and Natural Gas Driven
Pneumatic Pump Venting
F. Acid Gas Removal Unit Vents
G. Dehydrator Vents
H. Liquids Unloading
I. Gas Well Completions and Workovers With Hydraulic Fracturing
J. Blowdown Vent Stacks
K. Atmospheric Storage Tanks
L. Flared Transmission Storage Tank Vent Emissions
M. Associated Gas Venting and Flaring
N. Flare Stack Emissions
O. Compressors
P. Equipment Leak Surveys
Q. Equipment Leaks by Population Count
R. Offshore Production
S. Combustion Equipment
T. Leak Detection and Measurement Methods
U. Industry Segment-Specific Throughput Quantity Reporting
V. Other Proposed Minor Revisions or Clarifications
IV. Schedule for the Proposed Amendments
V. Proposed Confidentiality Determinations for Certain Data
Reporting Elements
A. Overview and Background
B. Proposed Confidentiality Determinations
C. Proposed Reporting Determinations for Inputs to Emissions
Equations
D. Request for Comments on Proposed Category Assignments,
Confidentiality Determinations, or Reporting Determinations
VI. Impacts of the Proposed Amendments
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
K. Determination Under CAA Section 307(d)
I. Background
A. How is this preamble organized?
The first section of this preamble contains background information
regarding the proposed amendments. This section also discusses the
EPA's legal authority under the Clean Air Act (CAA) to promulgate
(including subsequent amendments to) the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule,
codified at 40 CFR part 98 (hereafter referred to as ``part 98''),
generally and 40 CFR part 98, subpart W (hereafter referred to as
``subpart W'') in particular. This section also discusses the EPA's
legal authority to make confidentiality determinations for new or
revised data elements required by these amendments or for existing data
elements for which a confidentiality determination has not previously
been proposed. Section II of this preamble describes the types of
amendments included in this proposed rulemaking and includes the
rationale for each type of proposed change. Section III of this
preamble contains detailed information on the proposed revisions to 40
CFR part 98, subpart A (General Provisions), subpart C (General
Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources) and subpart W. Section IV of this
preamble discusses when the proposed revisions to part 98 would apply
to reporters. Section V of this preamble discusses the proposed
confidentiality determinations for new or substantially revised data
reporting elements (i.e., requiring additional or different data to be
reported), as well as for certain existing data elements for which a
determination has not been previously established. Section VI of this
preamble discusses the impacts of the proposed amendments. Section VII
of this preamble describes the statutory and Executive order
requirements applicable to this action.
B. Executive Summary
In August 2022, Congress passed, and President Biden signed, the
Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA) into law. Section 60113 of the
IRA amended the CAA by adding section 136, ``Methane Emissions and
Waste Reduction Incentive Program for Petroleum and Natural Gas
Systems.'' CAA section 136(c), ``Waste Emissions Charge,'' directs the
Administrator to impose and collect a charge on methane
(CH4) emissions that exceed statutorily specified waste
emissions thresholds from an owner or operator of an applicable
facility that reports more than 25,000 metric tons carbon dioxide
equivalent (mtCO2e) pursuant to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Rule's requirements for the petroleum and natural gas systems source
category (codified as subpart W in EPA's Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule
regulations). Further, CAA section 136(h) requires that the EPA shall,
within two years after the date of enactment of section 60113 of the
IRA, revise the requirements of subpart W to ensure the reporting under
subpart W (and corresponding waste emissions charges under CAA section
136) is based on empirical data, accurately reflects the total
CH4 emissions (and waste emissions) from the applicable
facilities, and allow owners and operators of applicable facilities to
submit empirical emissions data, in a manner to be prescribed by the
Administrator, to demonstrate the extent to which a charge is owed
under CAA section 136.
In this action, the EPA is proposing revisions to subpart W
consistent with the authority and directives set forth in CAA section
136(h) as well as the EPA's authority under CAA section 114. The EPA is
proposing revisions to include reporting of additional emissions or
emissions sources to address potential gaps in the total CH4
emissions reported by facilities to subpart W. These revisions include
proposing to add a new emissions source, referred to as ``other large
release events,'' to capture large emission events that are not
accurately accounted for using existing methods in subpart W. Other new
sources proposed to be added or included in revised existing sources
include nitrogen removal units, produced water tanks, mud degassing,
crankcase venting and combustion slip. The EPA is also proposing
several revisions to add new or revise existing calculation
methodologies to improve the accuracy of reported emissions,
incorporate additional empirical data and to allow owners and operators
of applicable facilities to submit empirical emissions data that could
appropriately demonstrate the extent to which a charge is owed in
future implementation of CAA section 136, as directed by CAA section
136(h). For example, the EPA is proposing new calculation methodologies
for equipment leaks and natural gas
[[Page 50285]]
pneumatic devices to allow for the use of direct measurement. The EPA
is also proposing several revisions to existing reporting requirements
to collect data that would improve verification of reported data,
ensure accurate reporting of emissions, and improve the transparency of
reported data. For example, the EPA is proposing to disaggregate
reporting requirements within the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segments, with most emissions and activity data for Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production and Onshore Petroleum and Natural
Gas Gathering and Boosting being disaggregated to at least the well-pad
and site-level, respectively. The EPA is also proposing other technical
amendments, corrections, and clarifications that would improve
understanding of the rule. These revisions primarily include revisions
of requirements to better reflect the EPA's intent or editorial
changes. The proposed revisions under this rulemaking are described in
further detail in sections II and III of this preamble. The EPA will be
undertaking one or more separate actions in the future to implement the
remainder of CAA section 136.
C. Background on This Proposed Rule
This proposed action builds on previous Greenhouse Gas reporting
rulemakings. The Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule was published in the
Federal Register (FR) on October 30, 2009 (74 FR 56260) (hereafter
referred to as the 2009 Final Rule). The 2009 Final Rule became
effective on December 29, 2009, and requires reporting of GHGs from
various facilities and suppliers, consistent with the 2008 Consolidated
Appropriations Act.\1\ Although reporting requirements for petroleum
and natural gas systems were originally proposed to be part of part 98
(75 FR 16448, April 10, 2009), the final October 2009 rulemaking did
not include the petroleum and natural gas systems source category as
one of the 29 source categories for which reporting requirements were
finalized. The EPA re-proposed subpart W in 2010 (75 FR 18608; April
12, 2010), and a subsequent final rulemaking was published on November
30, 2010, with the requirements for the petroleum and natural gas
systems source category at 40 CFR part 98, subpart W (75 FR 74458)
(hereafter referred to as the ``2010 Final Rule''). Following
promulgation, the EPA finalized several technical and clarifying
amendments to subpart W (76 FR 22825, April 25, 2011; 76 FR 53057,
August 25, 2011; 76 FR 59533, September 27, 2011; 76 FR 73866, November
29, 2011; 76 FR 80554, December 23, 2011; 77 FR 48072, August 13, 2012;
77 FR 51477, August 24, 2012; 78 FR 25392, May 1, 2013; 78 FR 71904,
November 29, 2013; 79 FR 63750, October 24, 2014; 79 FR 70352, November
25, 2014; 80 FR 64262, October 22, 2015; and 81 FR 86490, November 30,
2016). These amendments generally added or revised requirements in
subpart W, including revisions that were intended to improve quality,
clarity, and consistency across the calculation, monitoring, and data
reporting requirements, and to finalize confidentiality and reporting
determinations for data elements reported under the subpart.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008, Public Law 110-161,
121 Stat. 1844, 2128.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
More recently, the EPA proposed amendments to subpart W on June 21,
2022 (87 FR 36920) (hereafter referred to as the ``2022 Proposed
Rule''), including technical amendments to improve the quality and
consistency of the data collected under the rule and resolve data gaps,
amendments to streamline and improve implementation, and revisions to
provide additional flexibility in the calculation methods and
monitoring requirements for some emission sources. The 2022 Proposed
Rule was developed prior to the enactment of the IRA and its direction
in CAA section 136(h) to revise subpart W. Consequently, in developing
this current proposed action, the EPA considered the proposed
amendments to subpart W from the 2022 Proposed Rule as well as the
concerns and information submitted by commenters in response to that
proposal. In this proposal, the EPA is again proposing to revise the
subpart W provisions, and our proposed revisions include both (1)
updates to the proposed revisions to subpart W that were in the 2022
Proposed Rule as well as (2) additional proposed revisions to comply
with CAA section 136(h). The EPA accordingly does not intend to
finalize the revisions to subpart W that were proposed in the 2022
Proposed Rule in the final version of that rule. Commenters who would
like the EPA to further consider in this rulemaking any relevant
comments that they provided on the 2022 Proposed Rule regarding its
proposed revisions to subpart W must resubmit those comments to the EPA
during this proposal's comment period.
Additionally, the EPA opened a non-regulatory docket on November 4,
2022, and issued a Request for Information (RFI) seeking public input
to inform program design related to CAA section 136.\2\ As part of this
request, the EPA sought input on revisions that should be considered
related to subpart W. The comment period closed on January 18, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2022-0875.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA also recently issued a supplemental proposal to the 2022
Proposed Rule (88 FR 32852, May 22, 2023), which included proposed
updates to the General Provisions of the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule
to reflect revised global warming potentials, proposed reporting of GHG
data from additional sectors (i.e., non-subpart W sectors), and
proposed revisions to source categories other than subpart W that would
improve implementation of the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule. These
proposed revisions are being undertaken in a separate action.
Accordingly, the EPA considers comments related to that action to be
outside the scope of this proposed rule.
D. Legal Authority
The EPA is proposing these rule amendments under its existing CAA
authority provided in CAA section 114 and under its newly established
authority provided in CAA section 136, as applicable. As stated in the
preamble to the 2009 Final Rule, CAA section 114(a)(1) provides the EPA
broad authority to require the information proposed to be gathered by
this rule because such data would inform and are relevant to the EPA's
carrying out of a variety of CAA provisions. See the preambles to the
proposed Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule (74 FR 16448, April 10, 2009)
and the 2009 Final Rule for further information. As noted in section
I.B of this preamble, the IRA added CAA section 136, ``Methane
Emissions and Waste Reduction Incentive Program for Petroleum and
Natural Gas Systems,'' which requires revisions to the requirements of
subpart W to ensure that reporting of CH4emissions under
subpart W (and corresponding waste emissions charges under CAA section
136) is based on empirical data, accurately reflects the total
CH4 emissions (and waste emissions) from applicable
facilities, and allows owners and operators to submit empirical
emissions data, in a manner prescribed by the Administrator, to
demonstrate the extent to which a charge is owed under CAA section 136.
Under CAA section 136, an ``applicable facility'' is a facility within
nine of the ten industry segments subject to subpart W, as currently
defined in 40 CFR 98.230 (excluding natural gas distribution).
[[Page 50286]]
The Administrator has determined that this action is subject to the
provisions of section 307(d) of the CAA. Section 307(d) contains a set
of procedures relating to the issuance and review of certain CAA rules.
In addition, pursuant to sections 114, 301, and 307 of the CAA, the
EPA is publishing proposed confidentiality determinations for the new
or substantially revised data elements required by these proposed
amendments. Section 114(c) requires that the EPA make information
obtained under section 114 available to the public, except for
information (excluding emission data) that qualifies for confidential
treatment.
E. Relationship to Other Clean Air Act Section 136 Actions
The IRA adds authorities under CAA section 136 to reduce
CH4 emissions from the oil and gas sector. It accomplishes
this in multiple ways. First, it provides incentives for CH4
mitigation and monitoring. Second, it establishes a waste emissions
charge for applicable facilities that exceed statutorily-specified
thresholds that vary by industry segment and are determined by the
amount of natural gas or oil sent to sale. Third, CAA section 136(h)
requires the EPA to revise subpart W. The first and second listed
aspects of CAA section 136 are outside the scope of this rulemaking.
CAA section 136 provides $1.55 billion in incentives for
CH4 mitigation and monitoring, including through grants,
rebates, contracts, loans, and other activities. Of these funds, at
least $700 million is allocated to activities at marginal conventional
wells. There are several potential uses of funds. Use of funds can
include financial and technical assistance to owners and operators of
applicable facilities to prepare and submit GHG reports under subpart
W. Financial assistance can also be provided for CH4
emissions monitoring authorized under CAA section 103 subsections (a)
through (c). Additionally, financial and technical assistance can be
provided to: reduce CH4 and other GHG emissions from
petroleum and natural gas systems, including to mitigate legacy air
pollution from petroleum and natural gas systems; improve climate
resilience of communities and petroleum and natural gas systems;
improve and deploy industrial equipment and processes that reduce
CH4 and other GHG emissions and waste; support innovation in
reducing CH4 and other GHG emissions and waste from
petroleum and natural gas systems; permanently shut in and plug wells
on non-Federal land; and mitigate health effects of CH4 and
other GHG emissions and legacy air pollution from petroleum and natural
gas systems in low-income and disadvantaged communities, and support
environmental restoration.
The EPA has provided initial public engagement and input
opportunities related to the design and implementation of these
incentives. This has included issuing an RFI \3\ to inform program
design and listening sessions to enable input directly to the EPA.
Through these engagement opportunities, the EPA has heard a number of
common themes. First, the EPA has received input that the EPA should
use funding mechanisms for rapid distribution of incentives. Second,
the EPA has heard about the need for addressing critical gaps and key
opportunities to achieve maximum impact. Third, the EPA has received
input about the need to address cumulative pollution for overburdened
communities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2022-0875.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA is moving expeditiously to implement the incentives for
CH4 mitigation and monitoring and anticipates making
announcements regarding next steps; however, as noted, those steps are
outside the scope of this rulemaking.
CAA section 136(c) provides that the Administrator shall impose and
collect a charge on CH4 emissions that exceed an applicable
waste emissions threshold under CAA section 136(f) from an owner or
operator of an applicable facility that reports more than 25,000
mtCO2e per year pursuant to subpart W. CAA section 136
provides various flexibilities and exemptions relating to the waste
emissions charge. The EPA intends to undertake one or more separate
actions in the future to implement the waste emissions charge and
intends to provide an opportunity for public comment in those actions;
therefore, as noted, implementation of the waste emissions charge is
outside the scope of this rulemaking.
As noted earlier, CAA section 136(h) requires revisions to subpart
W. The purpose of this proposed action is to meet directives set forth
in CAA section 136(h).
II. Overview and Rationale for Proposed Amendments to 40 CFR Part 98,
Subpart W
As discussed in section I of this preamble, in August 2022,
Congress passed, and President Biden signed, the IRA into law. Section
60113 of the IRA amended the CAA by adding section 136, ``Methane
Emissions and Waste Reduction Incentive Program for Petroleum and
Natural Gas Systems.'' CAA section 136(h) requires that the EPA shall,
within two years of the enactment of that section of the IRA, revise
the requirements of subpart W to ensure the reporting under that
subpart and calculation of charges under CAA section 136(e) and (f) are
based on empirical data, accurately reflect the total CH4
emissions and waste emissions from the applicable facilities, and allow
owners and operators of applicable facilities to submit empirical
emissions data, in a manner prescribed by the Administrator, to
demonstrate the extent to which a charge is owed. CAA section 136(d)
defines the term ``applicable facility'' as a facility within the
following industry segments as defined in subpart W: offshore petroleum
and natural gas production, onshore petroleum and natural gas
production, onshore natural gas processing, onshore gas transmission
compression, underground natural gas storage, liquefied natural gas
storage, liquefied natural gas import and export equipment, onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting, and onshore natural
gas transmission pipeline.
Empirical data can be defined as data that are collected by
observation and experiment. There are many forms of empirical data that
can be used to quantify GHG emissions. For purposes of this action, the
EPA interprets empirical data to mean data that are collected by
conducting observations and experiments that could be used to
accurately calculate emissions at a facility, including direct
emissions measurements, monitoring of CH4 emissions (e.g.,
leak surveys) or measurement of associated parameters (e.g., flow rate,
pressure, etc.), and published data. The EPA reviewed available
empirical data methods for accuracy and appropriateness for calculating
annual unit or facility-level GHG emissions. The review included both
the evaluation of technologies and methodologies already incorporated
in subpart W for measuring and reporting annual source- and facility-
level GHG emissions and the evaluation of the accuracy of potential
alternative technologies and methodologies, with a focus on
CH4 emissions due to the directive in CAA section 136(h).
Currently, subpart W specifies emission source types to be reported
for each industry segment and provides methodologies to calculate
emissions from each source type, which are then summed to generate the
total subpart W emissions for the facility. Current calculation methods
can be grouped
[[Page 50287]]
into five categories: (1) direct emissions measurement; (2) combination
of measurement and engineering calculations; (3) engineering
calculations; (4) leak detection and use of a leaker emission factor;
and (5) population count and population emission factors. Subpart W
emission factors (both population and leaker emission factors) include
both those developed from published empirical data and those developed
from site-specific data collected by the reporting facility. The EPA
developed the current subpart W monitoring and reporting requirements
to use the most appropriate monitoring and calculation methods,
considering both the accuracy of the emissions calculated by the
proposed method and the size of the emission source based on the
methods and data available at the time of the applicable rule
promulgation. Considering the directives set forth in CAA section 136,
the EPA re-evaluated the existing methodologies to determine if they
are likely to accurately reflect CH4 and waste emissions at
an individual facility, whether the existing methodologies used
empirical data, and whether the existing methodologies should be
modified or replaced to meet CAA section 136 directives. In cases where
source-level emissions were determined to be highly variable, not well
characterized by an available method in subpart W, and a more accurate
method, such as direct emissions measurement, is available, the EPA is
proposing to update reporting requirements to reflect only
methodologies that have been determined to likely accurately
characterize unit or facility-level emissions. For example,
intermittent bleed pneumatic devices are designed to vent during
actuation only, but these devices are known to often malfunction and
operate incorrectly which causes them to release gas to the atmosphere
when idle, leading to high degree of variance in emissions from
pneumatic devices between facilities (see Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Rule: Technical Support for Revisions and Confidentiality
Determinations for Data Elements Under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Rule; Proposed Rule--Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems, hereafter
referred to as the ``subpart W TSD,'' available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234, for more information).
The EPA welcomes comments on all aspects of this technical support
document. Even in cases where the EPA considers an existing method that
is not based on direct measurement or emission monitoring provides a
reasonably accurate calculation of emissions for a facility, we also
reviewed whether a direct emission measurement or emission monitoring
method could be added to subpart W, if one was not already available,
to give owners and operators the opportunity to submit empirical data.
The EPA also evaluated whether there were gaps in the emission source
types reporting CH4 emissions under subpart W and whether
there were methodologies available to calculate those emissions.
The proposed amendments include:
Revisions to expand reporting to include new emission
sources, in order to accurately reflect total CH4 emissions
reported to the GHGRP.
Revisions to add emissions calculation methodologies to
incorporate additional empirical data and improve the accuracy of
reported emission data.
Revisions to refine existing emissions calculation
methodologies to reflect an improved understanding of emissions or to
incorporate more recent research on GHG emissions to improve the
accuracy of reported emission data.
Revisions to remove calculation methodologies in cases
where it was determined that more accurate calculation methodologies
were available.
The EPA has also identified additional areas where revisions to
part 98 would improve the EPA's ability to verify the accuracy of
reported emissions and improve data transparency and alignment with
other EPA programs and regulations. The EPA also identified areas where
additional data or revised data elements may be necessary for future
implementation of the waste emissions charge under CAA section 136. The
proposed revisions include:
Revisions to report emissions from facilities in the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production and Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry segments at the site level
instead of at the basin level, sub-basin level, or county level.
Addition of data elements related to emissions from
plugged wells.
Addition or clarification of throughput-related data
elements for subpart W industry segments.
Revisions to data elements or recordkeeping where the
current requirements are redundant or alternative data would be more
appropriate for verification of emission data.
Revisions that provide additional information for
reporters to better or more fully understand their compliance
obligations, revisions that emphasize the EPA's intent for requirements
that reporters appear to have previously misinterpreted to ensure that
accurate data are being collected, and editorial corrections or
harmonizing changes that would improve the public's understanding of
the rule.
Sections II.A through II.D of this preamble describe the above
changes in more detail and provide the EPA's rationale for the changes
included in each category. Additional details for the specific
amendments proposed for each subpart are included in section III of
this preamble. We are seeking public comment only on the proposed
revisions and issues specifically identified in this document for the
identified subparts. We expect to deem any comments received addressing
other aspects of 40 CFR part 98 or other rulemakings to be outside of
the scope of this proposed rulemaking.
In addition, on November 15, 2021 (86 FR 63110), the EPA proposed
under CAA section 111(b) standards of performance for certain new,
reconstructed, and modified oil and natural gas sources (40 CFR part
60, subpart OOOOb) (hereafter referred to as ``NSPS OOOOb''), as well
as emissions guidelines under CAA section 111(d) for certain existing
oil and natural gas sources (40 CFR part 60, subpart OOOOc) (hereafter
referred to as ``EG OOOOc'') (the sources affected by these two
proposed subparts are collectively referred to in this preamble as
``affected sources''). On December 6, 2022, the EPA issued a
supplemental proposal to update, strengthen and expand the standards
proposed on November 15, 2021 (87 FR 74702). While the standards in
proposed NSPS OOOOb would directly apply to new, reconstructed, and
modified sources when finalized, the final EG OOOOc would not impose
binding requirements directly on sources; rather it would contain
guidelines, including presumptive standards, for states to follow in
developing, submitting, and implementing plans to establish standards
of performance to limit GHGs (in the form of CH4 limitations) from
existing oil and gas sources within their own states. If a state does
not submit a plan to the EPA for approval in response to the final
emission guidelines, or if the EPA disapproves a state's plan, then the
EPA must establish a Federal plan. In addition, a Federal plan could
apply to sources located on Tribal lands where the tribe does not
request approval to develop a tribal implementation plan similar to a
state plan. Once the Administrator approves a state plan under CAA
section 111(d), the plan is
[[Page 50288]]
codified in 40 CFR part 62 (Approval and Promulgation of State Plans
for Designated Facilities and Pollutants) within the relevant subpart
for that state.\4\ 40 CFR part 62 also includes all Federal plans
promulgated pursuant to CAA section 111(d). Therefore, rather than
referencing the presumptive standards in EG OOOOc, which would not
directly apply to sources, the proposed amendments to subpart W
reference 40 CFR part 62.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ 40 CFR part 62 contains a subpart for each of the 50 states,
District of Columbia, American Samoa, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands,
and Northern Mariana Islands.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Similar to the 2016 amendments to align subpart W requirements with
certain requirements in 40 CFR part 60, subpart OOOOa (hereafter
referred to as ``NSPS OOOOa'') (81 FR 86500, November 30, 2016), we are
proposing revisions to certain requirements in subpart W relative to
the requirements proposed for NSPS OOOOb and the presumptive standards
proposed in EG OOOOc (which would inform the standards to be developed
and codified at 40 CFR part 62). As in the 2016 rule, the proposed
amendments would also allow facilities to use a consistent method to
demonstrate compliance with multiple EPA programs. This proposal would
limit burden for subpart W facilities with affected sources that would
also be required to comply with the proposed NSPS OOOOb or a State or
Federal plan in part 62 implementing EG OOOOc by allowing them to use
data derived from the implementation of the NSPS OOOOb to calculate
emissions for the GHGRP rather than requiring the use of different
monitoring methods. Consistent with that goal, the EPA expects that the
final amendments to subpart W would reference the final version of the
method(s) in the NSPS OOOOb and EG OOOOc. These amendments would also
improve the emission calculations reported under the GHGRP.
Specifically, we are proposing amendments to the subpart W calculation
methodologies for flares, centrifugal and reciprocating compressors,
and equipment leak surveys related to the proposed NSPS OOOOb and
presumptive standards in EG OOOOc, and we are proposing new reporting
requirements for ``other large release events'' as defined in subpart W
that would reference the NSPS OOOOb and approved state plans or
applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62. These proposed amendments
are described in sections III.B, N, O, and P. If finalized, the
provisions of these proposed amendments that reference the NSPS OOOOb
and approved state plans or applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62
would not apply to individual reporters unless and until their emission
sources are required to comply with either the final NSPS OOOOb or an
approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62. In
the meantime, reporters would have the option to comply with the
calculation methodologies that would be required for sources subject to
NSPS OOOOb or 40 CFR part 62, or they would comply instead with the
applicable provisions of subpart W that apply to sources not subject to
NSPS OOOOb or 40 CFR part 62. For example, for flare sources subject to
NSPS OOOOb, facilities would have the option to comply with the flare
monitoring requirements in NSPS OOOOb even if the source is not yet
subject to or will not be subject to those provisions. For the ``other
large release events'' source category, emissions from other large
release events would be required to be calculated and reported starting
in Reporting Year (RY) 2025; the requirements to calculate and report
these emissions is not dependent on whether a source is subject to NSPS
OOOOb or 40 CFR part 62.
The specific changes that we are proposing, as described in this
section, are described in detail in section III of this preamble.
A. Revisions To Address Potential Gaps in Reporting of Emissions Data
for Specific Sectors
We are proposing several amendments to include reporting of
additional emissions or emissions sources to address potential gaps in
the total CH4 emissions reported per facility to subpart W. In
particular, based on recent analyses such as those conducted for the
annual Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks (U.S. GHG
Inventory), and data newly available from atmospheric observations, we
have become aware of potentially significant sources of emissions for
which there are no current emission estimation methods or reporting
requirements within part 98. For subpart W, we are proposing to add
calculation methodologies and requirements to report GHG emissions for
several additional sources. We are proposing to add a new emissions
source, referred to as ``other large release events,'' to capture
abnormal emission events that are not accurately accounted for using
existing methods in subpart W. This additional source would cover
events such as storage wellhead leaks, well blowouts,\5\ and other
large, atypical release events and would apply to all types of
facilities subject to subpart W. Reporters would calculate GHG
emissions using measurement data or engineering estimates of the amount
of gas released and measurement data, if available, or process
knowledge (best available data) to estimate the composition of the
released gas. We are also proposing to add calculation methodologies
and requirements to report GHG emissions for several other new emission
sources, including nitrogen removal units, produced water tanks, mud
degassing and crankcase venting. None of these sources are currently
accounted for in subpart W, and the EPA is proposing to include them
because they are likely to have a meaningful impact on reported CH4
emissions. We are also proposing to revise the existing methodologies
and add new measurement-based methodologies, consistent with section
II.B., for determining combustion emissions from reciprocating internal
combustion engines (RICE) and gas turbines (GT), including those that
drive compressors, to account for combustion slip, which is not
currently accounted for under the existing calculation methodologies
for combustion emissions. We are also proposing to require reporting of
existing emission sources by additional industry segments. For example,
we are proposing to require liquefied natural gas (LNG) import/export
facilities to begin calculating and reporting emissions from acid gas
removal unit (AGR) vents. Additional details of these types of proposed
changes may be found in section III of this preamble.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ We are proposing to define a well blowout in 40 CFR 98.238
as a complete loss of well control for a long duration of time
resulting in an emissions release.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed changes would ensure that the reporting under subpart
W accurately reflects the total CH4 emissions and waste
emissions as required by CAA section 136(h).
B. Revisions To Add New Emissions Calculation Methodologies or Improve
Existing Emissions Calculation Methodologies
We are proposing several revisions to add new or revise existing
calculation methodologies to improve the accuracy of emissions data
reported to the GHGRP, incorporate additional empirical data and to
allow owners and operators of applicable facilities to submit empirical
emissions data that appropriately could demonstrate the extent to which
a charge is owed in
[[Page 50289]]
future implementation of CAA section 136, as directed by CAA section
136(h). Currently, subpart W specifies emission source types to be
reported for each industry segment and provides methodologies to
calculate emissions from each source type, which are then summed to
generate the total subpart W emissions for the facility. Considering
the directives set forth in CAA section 136, the EPA re-evaluated the
existing methodologies for each source to determine if they are likely
to accurately reflect CH4 and waste emissions at an
individual facility, whether the existing methodologies used empirical
data, e.g., direct emissions measurements or monitoring of
CH4 emissions or measurement of associated parameters, and
whether the existing methodologies should be modified or replaced to
meet CAA section 136 directives. A summary list of the emissions
sources proposed to be reported with the corresponding proposed
monitoring and emissions calculation methods is available in the
subpart W TSD, available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id.
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234. Many sources in subpart W already have or
require calculation methodologies that use direct emission measurement
including AGR vents, large reciprocating compressor rod packing vents,
large compressor blowdown vent valve leaks, and large compressor
blowdown vent (unit isolation valve leaks), the latter two when leakage
is detected via screening. Currently, subpart W has required direct
measurement when the magnitude of emissions are potentially large and
no credible engineering calculation methods or emission factors existed
to accurately characterize emissions. In this proposal, the EPA is
proposing new calculation methodologies to allow for the use of direct
measurement, including for equipment leaks and natural gas pneumatic
devices. The EPA is also proposing new calculation methodologies to
allow for the development of site-specific emission factors for
equipment leaks and pneumatic devices based on data collected from
direct measurement at the facility.
We are proposing several revisions to modify calculation equations
to incorporate refinements to methodologies based on an improved
understanding of emission sources. In some cases, we have become aware
of discrepancies between assumptions in the current emission estimation
methods and the processes or activities conducted at specific
facilities, where the proposed revisions would reduce reporter errors.
In other cases, we are proposing to revise the emissions estimation
methodologies to incorporate recent studies on GHG emissions or
formation that reflect updates to scientific understanding of GHG
emissions sources. The proposed changes would improve the quality and
accuracy of the data collected under the GHGRP.
We are also proposing to revise several existing calculation
methodologies to incorporate empirical data obtained at the facility.
Emissions can be reliably calculated for sources such as tanks and
glycol dehydrators using standard engineering first principle methods
such as those available in API 4697 E&P Tanks \6\ and GRI-
GLYCalcTM.\7\ Using such software also addresses safety
concerns that are associated with direct emissions measurement from
these sources. For example, sometimes the temperature of the emissions
stream for glycol dehydrator vent stacks is too high for operators to
safely measure emissions. However, currently in subpart W, these
methods allow for use of best available data for inputs to the model.
The EPA has noted that in some cases, such as with reporting of
emissions from some dehydrators, the data used to calculate emissions
are not based on actual operating conditions but instead based on
``worst-case scenarios'' or other estimates. In these cases, the
accuracy of the reported emissions would be improved by using actual
operating conditions as measured at the unit. In this proposal, for
large glycol dehydrators and AGRs, we are proposing to require that
certain input parameters are based on actual measurements at the unit
level in order to improve the accuracy of the reported emissions for
these sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ E&P Tanks v3.0 software and the user guide (Publication
4697) formerly available from the American Petroleum Institute (API)
website.
\7\ GRI-GLYCalcTM software available from Gas
Technology Institute website (https://sales.gastechnology.org/).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In order to improve the accuracy of the data collected under the
GHGRP, we are proposing to revise emission factors where improved
measurement data has become available or we have received additional
information from stakeholders. Some of the calculation methodologies
provided in the GHGRP rely on the use of emission factors that are
based on published empirical data. The use of default emission factors
decreases the need for additional monitoring or measurements from
individual facilities, while in many cases still providing a reasonably
accurate estimate of facility-level emissions. The proposed rule
includes revisions to emission factors for a number of emission source
types, where we have received or identified updated measurement data.
In cases where there is significant variability in source-level
emissions and the default emission factors are thus not appropriately
representative of facility-level emissions, and other calculation
methodologies are available that are representative of facility-level
emissions, we are proposing to remove default emission factors. For
example, for intermittent bleed pneumatics, we are proposing three new
methodologies for measuring emissions and are therefore proposing to
remove use of default population emission factors for calculating
emissions.
We are proposing to update the emission factors for continuous low
and high bleed natural gas pneumatic devices and for equipment leaks
from natural gas distribution sources (including pipeline mains and
services, below grade transmission-distribution transfer stations, and
below grade metering-regulating stations) and equipment at onshore
petroleum and natural gas production and onshore petroleum and natural
gas gathering and boosting facilities in subpart W. The proposed
emission factors are more representative of GHG emissions sources and
would improve the overall accuracy of the emission data collected under
the GHGRP. Additional details of these types of proposed changes may be
found in section III of this preamble.
In addition to the methods discussed above, we reviewed measurement
approaches that utilize information from satellite, aerial, and
continuous monitoring (``top-down approaches'') to detect and/or
quantify emissions from petroleum and natural gas systems for the
purposes of subpart W reporting. Top-down technologies have been a
focus for research and emission monitoring strategies, and the
technologies have progressed in recent years to provide reliable
CH4 emission monitoring and quantification in many cases.
Top-down technologies include instruments located on satellites,
aircraft, and mobile platforms. These technologies can also include
Advanced Mobile Leak Detection (AMLD) and other continuous monitoring
sensors. Top-down approaches have certain benefits related to
geographic coverage, repeatability, and periodic measurements.
Depending on the technology (satellite, aircraft, drone), the scale of
observation can provide data useful for quantifying emissions in a
range of cases, from quantifying emissions for a single point source,
such
[[Page 50290]]
as a wellhead, to a basin-wide measurement. This data can be used to
develop emissions estimates for the duration of the observation or can
be used in combination with additional observations or other data
inputs to estimate emissions from a longer time frame. Satellite remote
sensing technologies currently take measurements of concentrations at
altitudes of 400 to 800 kilometers with CH4 detection limits
of approximately 50 to 25,000 kilograms per hour (kg/hr),\8\ with one
system citing 2 parts per billion (ppb); \9\ high altitude remote
sensing (by airplane) measure at altitudes of 168 to 12,000 meters (m)
with CH4 detection limits of approximately 1 to 50 kg/hr;
\10\ and low altitude aerial remote sensing (by drone) take
measurements at altitudes of 30 to 150 m with CH4 detection
ranging from approximately 5 to 250 parts per million (ppm) (depending
on distance).11 12 For remote sensing technologies, the size
of the area monitored is typically inversely related to the detection
levels. Further discussion of our review of top-down technologies is
available in the subpart W TSD, available in the docket for this
rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See GHGSat. GHGSat Media Kit. (2021). Available at https://www.ghgsat.com/upload/misc/GHGSAT_MEDIAKIT_2021.pdf; Pandey, S., et
al. ``Satellite observations reveal extreme methane leakage from a
natural gas well blowout.'' Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences, Vol. 116, no. 52. Pp. 26376-26381, December 16, 2019,
available at https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1908712116; Jacob, D. J.,
et al. ``Quantifying methane emissions from the global scale down to
point sources using satellite observations of atmospheric methane.''
Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, Vol. 22, Issue 14, pp. 9617-9646,
July 29, 2022, available at https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-9617-2022; Anderson, V., et al. ``Technological opportunities for sensing
of the health effects of weather and climate change: a state-of-the-
art-review.'' International Journal of Biometeorology, Vol. 65,
Issue 6, pp. 779-803, January 11, 2021, available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-020-02063-z. The documents are also available
in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-
0234.
\9\ Anderson et al. (2021).
\10\ See Conrad, B. M., Tyner, D. R. & Johnson, M. R. ``Robust
probabilities of detection and quantification uncertainty for aerial
methane detection: Examples for three airborne technologies.''
Remote Sensing of Environment, Vol. 288, p. 113499, available at
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2023.113499. 2023; Duren, R. M., et
al. ``California's methane super-emitters.'' Nature, Vol. 575, Issue
7781, pp. 180-184, available at https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1720-3. 2019; Thorpe, A.K., et al. ``Airborne DOAS retrievals of
methane, carbon dioxide, and water vapor concentrations at high
spatial resolution: application to AVIRIS-NG.'' Atmos. Meas. Tech.,
10, 3833-3850, available at https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-10-3833-2017. 2017; Staebell, C., et al. ``Spectral calibration of the
MethaneAIR instrument.'' Atmospheric Measurement Techniques, Vol.
14, Issue 5, pp. 3737-3753, available at https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-14-3737-2021. 2021. The documents are also available in the
docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
\11\ Morales, R., et al. ``Controlled-release experiment to
investigate uncertainties in UAV-based emission quantification for
methane point sources.'' Atmos. Meas. Tech., 15, 2177-2198, https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-15-2177-2022, 2022. Available in the docket for
this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
\12\ Ravikumar, A. P., et al. ``Single-blind inter-comparison of
methane detection technologies--results from the Stanford/EDF Mobile
Monitoring Challenge.'' Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene 1
January 2019; 7 37. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.373.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There have been several studies asserting that bottom-up
CH4 emission estimates reported by subpart W facilities
underestimate annual CH4 emissions.\13\ This underestimate
is often attributed to large, often episodic emissions (i.e., super-
emitters).\14\ Emissions estimates developed with remote sensing data
may be more likely to include super-emitters, and therefore, to the
extent that they capture emissions that would not have otherwise been
included under prior GHGRP regulations, they can demonstrate where
existing reporting data may underestimate total emissions. Some top-
down approaches have a demonstrated ability to provide data useful for
quantifying emissions from very large, distinct emission events, such
as production well blowouts. In the U.S. GHG Inventory, the EPA has
already incorporated emissions estimates developed from such approaches
to calculate emissions from well blowouts.\15\ In this proposal, data
from such approaches could be used to identify and/or calculate
emission rates of other large release events (see section III.B of this
preamble).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See, e.g., Caulton, et al. ``Toward a better understanding
and quantification of methane emissions from shale gas
development.'' Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol.
111, Issue 17, pp. 6237-6242, available at https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1316546111. 2014; Alvarez, et al. ``Quantifying Regional
Methane Emissions in the New Mexico Permian Basin with a
Comprehensive Aerial Survey.'' Environmental Science & Technology,
Vol. 56, Issue 7, pp. 4317-4323, available at https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aar7204. 2018; Zhang, et al. ``Quantifying methane
emissions from the largest oil-producing basin in the United States
from space.'' Science Advances, Vol. 6, Issue 17, available at
https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aaz5120. 2020. The documents are also
available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2023-0234.
\14\ See, e.g., Zavala-Ariaza, et al. ``Reconciling divergent
estimates of oil and gas methane emissions.'' Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 112, Issue 51, pp. 15597-15602,
available at https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1522126112. 2017;
Cusworth, et al. ``Intermittency of Large Methane Emitters in the
Permian Basin.'' Environmental Science & Technology Letters, Vol. 8,
Issue 7, pp. 567-573, available at https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.estlett.1c00173. 2021; Chen, et al. ``Quantifying Regional
Methane Emissions in the New Mexico Permian Basin with a
Comprehensive Aerial Survey.'' Environmental Science & Technology,
Vol. 56, Issue 7, pp. 4317-4323, available at https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.1c06458. 2022; Wang, et al. ``Multiscale Methane
Measurements at Oil and Gas Facilities Reveal Necessary Frameworks
for Improved Emissions Accounting.'' Environmental Science &
Technology, Vol. 56, Issue 20, pp. 14743-14752, available at https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.2c06211. 2022. The documents are also
available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2023-0234.
\15\ U.S. EPA. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and
Sinks 1990-2020: Updates for Anomalous Events including Well Blowout
and Well Release Emissions. April 2022. Available at https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2022-04/2022_ghgi_update_-_blowouts.pdf and in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this proposal, the EPA is proposing to include emissions from
large emissions events and super-emitters in the subpart W reporting
program. This proposed addition would directly address the concerns
identified by a multitude of studies about the contribution of super-
emitters to total emissions and help to ensure the completeness and
accuracy of emissions reporting data. The top-down monitoring
approaches that have demonstrated their accuracy and ability to
identify such events are a central feature of the proposed changes.
This top-down data may also help to flag areas where there is a large
gap between the bottom-up CH4 emissions estimates and the
top-down measurement data, requiring facilities to revise emission
estimates. In this proposal, we are proposing to require facilities to
consider notifications of potential super-emitter emissions event under
the super-emitter provisions of NSPS OOOOb at 40 CFR 60.5371b and
calculate associated events when they exceed our proposed thresholds if
they are not already accounted for under another source category in
subpart W. We expect that under the proposed methodology for other
large release events in this proposal, data from some top-down
approaches, including data derived from equipment leak and fugitive
emissions monitoring using advanced screening methods which is
conducted under NSPS OOOOb or the applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62, in combination with other
empirical data, could be used by reporters to calculate the total
emissions from these events and/or estimate duration of such an event.
While this top-down data is very useful in identifying possible
large emissions events that are not captured by other reporting
obligations, it is not presently able to provide annual emissions data
to the degree of accuracy and certainty required by other provisions of
this rulemaking. It is not
[[Page 50291]]
currently possible to use remote sensing data as the only basis to
extrapolate annual emissions data. Most top-down, facility measurements
are taken over limited durations (a few minutes to a few hours)
typically during the daylight hours and limited to times when specific
meteorological conditions exist (e.g., no cloud cover for satellites;
specific atmospheric stability and wind speed ranges for aerial
measurements). These direct measurement data taken at a single moment
in time may not be representative of the annual CH4
emissions from the facility, given that many emissions are episodic. If
emissions are found during a limited duration sampling, that does not
necessarily mean they are present for the entire year. And if emissions
are not found during a limited duration sampling, that does not mean
significant emissions are not occurring at other times. Extrapolating
from limited measurements to an entire year therefore creates risk of
either over or under counting actual emissions.
While top-down measurement methods, including satellite and aerial
methods, have proven their ability to identify and measure large
emissions events, their detection limits may be too high to detect
emissions from sources with relatively low emission rates.\16\ The data
provided by some of these technologies are at large spatial scales,
with limited ability to disaggregate to the facility- or emission
source-level and have high minimum detection limits. So while these
technologies can provide very useful information about emissions during
snapshots in time, and thus help to greatly improve the completeness
and accuracy of emission reporting, they generally cannot by themselves
estimate annual emissions. This rule proposes to use these top-down
methods to supplement the other requirements for periodic measurement
and calculation of annual emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Duren, et al. ``California's methane super-emitters.''
Nature, Vol. 575, Issue 7781, pp. 180-184, available at https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1720-3. 2019. Available in the docket for
this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the proposed use of top-down data to help identify
and quantify super-emitter and other large emissions events, we invite
comment on whether there are other appropriate uses of top-down data
for the purposes of reporting under subpart W of the GHGRP, including
what types of emission sources and emission events, what specific top-
down methods may be appropriate, especially in terms of spatial scale
and minimum detection limits. As described above, the different types
of top-down data have a wide range of detection limits and spatial
resolution, which makes it difficult to reliably convert point
estimates to an annual emissions estimate as required by the GHGRP.
Therefore, this proposal does not propose using top-down approaches for
sources other than besides other large release events due to the
limitations described earlier in this section. However, we invite
comment on whether there are top-down approaches that could be used to
estimate annual emissions for any source categories under subpart W or
for facility-level emissions, what level of accuracy should be required
for such use, and whether the development of standards (either by the
EPA or third-party organizations) could help inform this determination.
We also invite comment on how frequently measurements would need to be
conducted to be considered reliable or representative of annual
emissions for reporting purposes.
We invite comment on how best to combine top-down data with bottom-
up methods in a way that avoids double counting of emissions. For
example, top-down data may be used to refine emission estimates for
particular sources or for the facility. We also seek comment on the
best methods to estimate duration of events measured using top-down
measurements and extrapolation to annual emissions. We also invite
comment on the associated modeling necessary to incorporate top-down
data and the associated uncertainties for calculating facility-level
emissions. We also request comment on how to account for the types of
limitations described in this section.
C. Revisions to Reporting Requirements To Improve Verification and
Transparency of the Data Collected
The EPA is proposing several revisions to existing reporting
requirements to collect data that would improve verification of
reported data and ensure accurate reporting of emissions or improve the
transparency of the data collected. Such revisions would better enable
the EPA to obtain data that is of sufficient quality and granularity
that it can be used to support a range of future climate change
policies and regulations under the CAA, including but not limited to
information relevant to carrying out CAA section 136, provisions
involving research, evaluating and setting standards, endangerment
determinations, or informing EPA non-regulatory programs under the CAA.
We are proposing to add or revise reporting requirements to better
characterize the emissions for several emission sources. For example,
we are proposing to collect additional information from facilities with
liquids unloadings to differentiate between manual and automated
unloadings.
Other proposed revisions to the rule include changes that would
better align reporting with the calculation methods in the rule. For
example, we are proposing to revise reporting requirements related to
atmospheric pressure fixed roof storage tanks receiving hydrocarbon
liquids that follow the methodology specified in 40 CFR 98.233(j)(3)
and equation W-15. The current calculation methodology uses population
emission factors and the count of applicable separators, wells, or non-
separator equipment to determine the annual total volumetric GHG
emissions at standard conditions. The associated reporting requirements
in existing 40 CFR 98.236(j)(2)(i)(E) and (F) require reporters to
delineate the counts used in equation W-15. Based on feedback from
reporters, the EPA's assessment in this proposal is that the reporting
requirements are inconsistent with the language used in the calculation
methodology and are not inclusive of all equipment to be included.
Therefore, we are proposing to revise the reporting requirements to
better align the requirement with the calculation methodology and
streamline the requirements for all facilities reporting atmospheric
storage tanks emissions using the methodology in 40 CFR 98.233(j)(3).
In some cases, we are proposing to remove duplicative reporting
elements within or across GHGRP subparts to reduce data inconsistencies
and reporting errors. For example, we are proposing to eliminate
duplicative reporting between subpart NN (Suppliers of Natural Gas and
Natural Gas Liquids) and subpart W where both subparts require similar
data elements to be reported to the electronic Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Tool (e-GGRT). For instance, for fractionators of natural gas liquids
(NGLs), both subpart W (under the Onshore Natural Gas Processing
segment) and subpart NN require reporting of the volume of natural gas
received and the volume of NGLs received. The proposed amendments would
limit the reporting of these data elements to facilities that do not
report under subpart NN, thus removing the duplicative requirements
from subpart W for facilities that report to both subparts. This would
improve the EPA's ability to verify the reported data across subparts.
[[Page 50292]]
D. Technical Amendments, Clarifications, and Corrections
We are proposing other technical amendments, corrections, and
clarifications that would improve understanding of the rule. These
revisions primarily include revisions of requirements to better reflect
the EPA's intent or editorial changes. Some of these proposed changes
result from consideration of questions raised by reporters through the
GHGRP Help Desk or e-GGRT. In particular, we are proposing amendments
for several source types that would emphasize the original intent of
certain rule requirements, such as reported data elements that have
been misinterpreted by reporters. In several cases, the
misinterpretation of these provisions may have resulted in reporting
that is inconsistent with the rule requirements. The proposed
clarifications would increase the likelihood that reporters will submit
accurate reports the first time. For example, the EPA is proposing to
revise the definition of variable ``Tt'' in existing
equation W-1 (proposed equation W-1B) in 40 CFR 98.233 and the
corresponding reporting requirements in proposed 40 CFR
98.236(b)(4)(ii)(C)(4), (b)(4)(iii)(C)(3), and (b)(5)(i)(C)(2) to use
the term ``in service (i.e., supplied with natural gas)'' rather than
``operational'' or ``operating.'' This proposed revision would
emphasize the EPA's intent that the average number of hours used in
equation W-1 should be the number of hours that the devices of a
particular type are in service (i.e., the devices are receiving a
measurement signal and connected to a natural gas supply that is
capable of actuating a valve or other device as needed). These proposed
clarifications and corrections would also reduce the burden associated
with reporting, data verification, and EPA review. Additional details
of these types of proposed changes are discussed in section III of this
preamble.
We are also proposing to revise applicability provisions for
certain industry segments and applicable calculation methods. For
example, we are proposing to revise the definition of the Onshore
Natural Gas Processing industry segment to remove the gas throughput
threshold so that the applicable industry segment and calculation
methods are defined from the beginning of the year. The current
definition of the Onshore Natural Gas Processing industry segment
includes processing plants that fractionate gas liquids and processing
plants that do not fractionate gas liquids but have an annual average
throughput of 25 million standard cubic feet (MMscf) per day or
greater. Processing plants that do not fractionate gas liquids and have
an annual average throughput of less than 25 MMscf per day may be part
of a facility in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and
Boosting industry segment. Processing plants that do not fractionate
gas liquids and generally operate close to the 25 MMscf per day
threshold do not know until the end of the year whether they will be
above or below the threshold, so they must be prepared to report under
whichever industry segment is ultimately applicable. Therefore, as
discussed in greater detail in section III.A.3 of this preamble, we are
proposing to revise the Onshore Natural Gas Processing industry segment
definition in 40 CFR 98.230(a)(3) to remove the 25 MMscf per day
threshold and more closely align subpart W with the definitions of
natural gas processing in other rules (e.g., NSPS OOOOa). This proposed
revision to the Onshore Natural Gas Processing industry segment
definition would better define whether a processing plant would be
classified as an Onshore Natural Gas Processing facility or as part of
an Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting facility,
and the applicable segment would not have the potential to change from
one year to the next simply based on the facility throughput.
Additional details of these types of proposed changes may be found
in section III of this preamble.
Other minor changes being proposed include correction edits to fix
typos, minor clarifications such as adding a missing word, harmonizing
changes to match other proposed revisions, reordering of paragraphs so
that a larger number of paragraphs need not be renumbered, and others
as reflected in the draft proposed redline regulatory text in the
docket for this rulemaking (Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234).
III. Proposed Amendments to 40 CFR Part 98
This section summarizes the specific substantive amendments
proposed for subpart W (as well as subparts A and C), as generally
described in section II of this preamble. Section III.A describes
amendments that affect reporting responsibility or applicability.
Sections III.B through III.U of this preamble describe proposed
technical amendments that would affect specific source types or
industry segments. We are also proposing the miscellaneous subpart W
technical corrections and clarifications listed in section III.V of
this preamble. We are also proposing related confidentiality
determinations for new or revised data elements that result from these
proposed amendments, as discussed in section V of this preamble. The
impacts of the proposed revisions are summarized in section VI of this
preamble. A full discussion of the cost impacts for the proposed
revisions may be found in the memorandum, Assessment of Burden Impacts
for Proposed Revisions for the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule available
in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
A. General and Applicability Amendments
1. Ownership Transfer
When there is a change in ownership for facilities reported under
the GHGRP, the provisions of existing 40 CFR 98.4(h) describe the
responsibilities of the owners and operators. However, asset
transactions between owners and operators sometimes involve only some
emission sources at the facility rather than the entire facility,
particularly in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production and
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry
segments in subpart W (which are two of the industry segments that have
unique definitions of ``facility''). In those cases, reporters have
submitted numerous questions to the GHGRP Help Desk requesting guidance
regarding which owner or operator should report for the year in which
the transaction occurred as well as which owner or operator is
responsible for submitting revisions and responding to questions from
the EPA regarding previous annual GHG reports. To assist manufacturers
regarding some of these questions, the EPA previously developed
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Q749.\17\ However, neither the FAQ nor
the existing requirements in subpart A explicitly explain the
responsibilities for the situations for which reporters have requested
guidance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ U.S. EPA. Q749: ``What are the notification requirements
when an Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production facility,
reporting under subpart W, sells wells and associated equipment in a
basin?'' September 26, 2019. https://ccdsupport.com/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=198705183. Note that although FAQ Q749
specifically describes facilities in the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production segment, the EPA does consider the scenarios
described to be relevant to the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting industry segment as well, because facilities
in both segments are defined at the basin level rather than at the
level of the subpart A definition of facility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, the EPA is proposing to add specific provisions to
subpart A in
[[Page 50293]]
a proposed new paragraph 40 CFR 98.4(n) that would apply in lieu of
existing 40 CFR 98.4(h) for changes in the owner or operator of a
facility in the four industry segments in subpart W (Petroleum and
Natural Gas Systems) that have unique definitions of facility. The
proposed provisions would define which owner or operator is responsible
for current and future reporting years' reports and clarify how to
determine responsibility for revisions to annual reports for reporting
years prior to owner or operator changes for specific industry segments
in subpart W, beginning with RY2025 reports. The proposed provisions
would also specify when an owner or operator would submit an annual
report using an e-GGRT identifier assigned to an existing facility and
when an owner or operator would register a new facility in e-GGRT. As
described in more detail in this section, the provisions would vary
based upon whether the selling owner or operator would retain any
emission sources, the number of purchasing owners or operators, and
whether the purchasing owners or operators already report to the GHGRP
in the same industry segment and basin or state (as applicable). These
proposed revisions are expected to improve data quality as described in
section II.C of this preamble by ensuring that the EPA receives a more
complete data set, and they are also expected to improve understanding
of the rule, as described in section II.D of this preamble.
We expect all the transactions fall into one of four general
categories, and we are proposing provisions that would define the
responsibilities for reporting for each of those general categories.
First, if the entire facility is sold to a single purchaser and the
purchasing owner or operator does not already report to the GHGRP in
that industry segment (and basin or state, as applicable), then we are
proposing that the facility's certificate of representation must be
updated within 90 days of the transaction to reflect the new owner or
operator. In other words, the e-GGRT identifier and associated facility
within e-GGRT would be transferred from the seller to the purchaser.
The purchasing owner or operator would be responsible for submitting
the facility's annual report for the entire reporting year in which the
acquisition occurred (i.e., the owner or operator as of December 31
would be responsible for the report for that entire reporting year) and
each reporting year thereafter. In addition, because the definitions of
facility for each of these segments encompass all of the emission
sources in a particular geographic area (i.e., basin, state, or
nation), the purchasing owner or operator would include any other
applicable emission sources already owned by that purchasing owner or
operator in the same geographic area as part of the purchased facility
beginning with the reporting year in which the acquisition occurred.
The purchasing owner or operator would also become responsible for
responding to EPA questions and making any necessary revisions to
annual GHG reports for reporting years prior to the reporting year in
which the acquisition occurred. This scenario is the most similar to
ownership transfer for facilities in other subparts, and this proposed
amendment would specify that the responsibility for reporting should be
similar to the existing requirements for all subparts.
Second, if the entire facility is sold to a single purchaser and
the purchasing owner or operator already reports to the GHGRP in that
industry segment (and basin or state, as applicable), then we are
proposing that the purchasing owner or operator would merge the
acquired facility with their existing facility for purposes of
reporting under the GHGRP. In other words, the acquired facility would
become part of the purchaser's existing facility under the GHGRP and
emissions for the combined facility would be reported under the e-GGRT
identifier for the purchaser's existing facility. The purchaser would
update the acquired facility's certificate of representation within 90
days of the transaction to reflect the new owner or operator. The
purchaser would then follow the provisions of 40 CFR 98.2(i)(6) to
notify the EPA that the purchased facility has merged with their
existing facility and would provide the e-GGRT identifier for the
merged, or reconstituted, facility. Finally, the purchaser would be
responsible for submitting the merged facility's annual report for the
entire reporting year in which the acquisition occurred (i.e., the
owner or operator as of December 31 would be responsible for the report
for that entire reporting year) and each reporting year thereafter. The
purchasing owner or operator would also become responsible for
responding to EPA questions and making any necessary revisions to
annual GHG reports for the purchased facility for reporting years prior
to the reporting year in which the acquisition occurred. In this
scenario, an entire facility is changing ownership, and this proposed
amendment would specify that the responsibility for reporting should be
similar to the existing requirements for all subparts.
Third, if the selling owner or operator retains some of the
emission sources and sells the other emission sources of the seller's
facility to one or more purchasing owners or operators, we are
proposing that the selling owner or operator would continue to report
under subpart W for the retained emission sources unless and until that
facility meets one of the criteria in 40 CFR 98.2(i) and complies with
those provisions. Each purchasing owner or operator that does not
already report to the GHGRP in that industry segment (and basin or
state, as applicable) would begin reporting as a new facility for the
entire reporting year beginning with the reporting year in which the
acquisition occurred. The new facility would include the acquired
applicable emission sources as well as any previously owned applicable
emission sources. We note that, under the proposed provisions, because
the new facility would contain acquired emission sources that were part
of a facility that was subject to the requirements of part 98 and
already reporting to the GHGRP, the purchasing owner or operator would
follow the provisions of 40 CFR 98.2(i) and continue to report unless
and until one of the criteria in 40 CFR 98.2(i)(1) through (6) are met,
instead of comparing the facility's emissions to the reporting
threshold in 40 CFR 98.231(a) to determine if they should begin
reporting. Each purchasing owner or operator that already reports to
the GHGRP in that industry segment (and basin or state, as applicable)
would add the acquired applicable emission sources to their existing
facility for purposes of reporting under subpart W and would be
responsible for submitting the annual report for their entire facility,
including the acquired emission sources, for the entire reporting year
beginning with the reporting year in which the acquisition occurred.
Fourth, if the selling owner or operator does not retain any of the
emission sources and sells all of the facility's emission sources to
more than one purchasing owner or operator, we are proposing that the
selling owner or operator for the existing facility would notify the
EPA within 90 days of the transaction that all of the facility's
emission sources were acquired by multiple purchasers. The purchasing
owners or operators would begin submitting annual reports for the
acquired emission sources for the reporting year in which the
acquisition occurred following the same provisions as in the third
scenario. In other words, each owner or operator would either
[[Page 50294]]
begin reporting their acquired applicable emission sources as a new
facility or add the acquired applicable emission sources to their
existing facility.
Finally, for the third and fourth types of transactions, we are
proposing one set of provisions to clarify responsibility for annual
GHG reports for reporting years prior to the reporting year in which
the acquisition occurred. This set of proposed provisions would apply
to annual GHG reports for facilities where these types of transactions
occur after the effective date of the final amendments, if adopted. In
other words, if the effective date of the final amendments is January
1, 2025, as described in section V of this preamble, then for ownership
transactions that occur on or after January 1, 2025, we are proposing
that the proposed requirements for the current and future reporting
years described in the previous paragraphs would apply. In addition,
the proposed provisions for annual GHG reports for reporting years
prior to the transaction would also apply. For example, if an ownership
transaction occurs on June 30, 2027, then the selling owner or operator
and purchasing owner or operator would follow the proposed applicable
provisions previously described in this section for the RY2027 report
and for future reporting years. In this example scenario, the proposed
provisions described in the next paragraph would apply for RY2026 and
prior years' reports.
Specifically, we are proposing that as part of the third and fourth
types of ownership change described previously in this section, the
selling owner or operator and each purchasing owner or operator would
be required to select by an agreement binding on the owners and
operators (following the procedures specified in 40 CFR 98.4(b)) a
``historic reporting representative'' that would be responsible for
revisions to annual GHG reports for previous reporting years within 90
days of the transaction. The EPA expects that the agreement regarding
the historic reporting representative would be entered into at the time
of the acquisition and that if the representative responsible for
revisions to annual GHG reports is not employed by the selling owner or
operator, copies of the records required to be retained per 40 CFR
98.3(g) and (h) would be transferred to the historic reporting
representative at that time. The historic reporting representative for
each facility that would respond to any EPA questions regarding GHG
reports for previous reporting years and would submit corrected
versions of GHG reports for previous reporting years as needed. In many
situations, the EPA expects that the purchaser would agree to select a
historic reporting representative to address revisions to previous
years' annual GHG reports. In particular, there may be cases in which
the selling owner or operator's company will no longer be operating
after the transaction, so it may be appropriate for one of the
purchasing owners or operators to select that historic reporting
representative. In other situations, the parties may determine that it
is appropriate for the seller to select the historic reporting
representative to address revisions to annual GHG reports for reporting
years prior to the reporting year in which the acquisition occurred. In
the 2022 Proposed Rule, the EPA proposed that if this historic
reporting representative is not the current designated representative
for the facility, the historic reporting representative would need to
be appointed as the alternate designated representative or an agent for
the facility. However, in some cases this could provide that individual
with access to the facility's data for reporting years other than the
previous reporting years for which that individual is responsible,
including potentially confidential or sensitive information and
correspondence. Therefore, the EPA is not proposing to specify that the
historic reporting representative would be required to be appointed as
the alternate designated representative or an agent for the facility.
Finally, we are proposing to amend 40 CFR 98.2(i)(3), the current
provision that allows an owner or operator to discontinue reporting to
the GHGRP when all applicable processes and operations cease to
operate. Through correspondence with reporters via e-GGRT, we are aware
that there have been times that an owner or operator divested a
facility and was therefore no longer required to report the emissions
from that facility, but even though the facility changed owners and did
not cease operating, the selling owner or operator chose the provisions
of existing 40 CFR 98.2(i)(3) as the reason they were ceasing to report
because none of the other options fit the situation. The EPA's intent
is that this reason for no longer reporting to the GHGRP should only be
used in cases in which all the applicable sources permanently ceased
operation. Therefore, we are proposing to clarify that 40 CFR
98.2(i)(3) would not apply when there is a change in the owner or
operator for facilities in these four industry segments, unless the
changes result in permanent cessation of all applicable processes and
operations.
2. Definition of ``Owner'' and ``Operator''
We are also proposing to amend 40 CFR 98.1(c) to clarify that the
terms ``owner'' and ``operator'' used in subpart A have the same
meaning as the terms ``gathering and boosting system owner or
operator'' and ``onshore natural gas transmission pipeline owner or
operator'' for the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and
Boosting and Onshore Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline industry
segments of subpart W, respectively. This paragraph was inadvertently
not amended when those two industry segments and the industry segment-
specific definitions of owner or operator were added to subpart W (80
FR 64275, October 22, 2015), and this proposed amendment would correct
that oversight, consistent with section II.D of this preamble.
3. Onshore Natural Gas Processing Industry Segment Definition
According to existing 40 CFR 98.230(a)(3), the Onshore Natural Gas
Processing industry segment currently includes all facilities that
fractionate NGLs. The industry segment also includes all facilities
that separate NGLs from natural gas or remove sulfur and carbon dioxide
(CO2) from natural gas, provided the annual average
throughput at the facility is 25 MMscf per day or greater. The industry
segment also includes all residue gas compression equipment owned or
operated by natural gas processing facilities that is not located
within the facility boundaries.
One stakeholder expressed concern that the current definition of
the Onshore Natural Gas Processing industry segment applies to some
compressor stations simply because they have an amine unit that is used
to remove sulfur and CO2 from natural gas.\18\ According to
this stakeholder, it would be more appropriate for such facilities to
be in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segment. This stakeholder also explained that the 25 MMscf per
day threshold creates additional burden and uncertainty for these
compressor station facilities because they do not know until the end of
the year whether they will be above or below the threshold. Thus,
[[Page 50295]]
they need to collect the applicable data for both the Onshore Natural
Gas Processing industry segment and the Onshore Petroleum and Natural
Gas Gathering and Boosting industry segment so that they will have the
required data for whichever industry segment ultimately applies to
them. To resolve this issue and to promote consistency among regulatory
programs, this stakeholder recommended replacing the onshore natural
gas processing definition in subpart W with the natural gas processing
plant definition in NSPS OOOOa.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Letter from Matt Hite, GPA Midstream Association, to Mark
de Figueiredo, U.S. EPA, Re: Additional Information on Suggested
Part 98, Subpart W Rule Revisions to Reduce Burden. September 13,
2019. Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After consideration of this issue, we are proposing to replace the
definition of ``Onshore natural gas processing'' in 40 CFR 98.230(a)(3)
with language similar to the definition of ``natural gas processing
plant'' in NSPS OOOOa. This proposed amendment would improve the
verification and transparency of the data, particularly across
reporting years, consistent with section II.C of this preamble, and it
would provide reporters with certainty about the applicable industry
segment for the reporting year, consistent with section II.D of this
preamble, allowing them to focus their efforts on collecting accurate
monitoring data and emissions information needed for one applicable
industry segment. As explained later in this section, while we expect
that the proposed revisions would result in some facilities reporting
under a different industry segment, we do not expect that the overall
coverage of the GHGRP would decrease. Further, as the stakeholder
noted, the two potentially applicable segments currently report
emissions from different sources and with different calculation
methods. For example, facilities in the Onshore Natural Gas Processing
industry segment are currently not required to report emissions from
natural gas pneumatic devices or atmospheric storage tanks and are
currently required to measure leaks from individual compressors, while
facilities in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and
Boosting industry segment are currently required to report emissions
from natural gas pneumatic devices or atmospheric storage tanks but
currently use population emission factors to calculate emissions from
all compressors rather than conducting measurements. However, the
proposed addition of emission sources to the Onshore Natural Gas
Processing industry segment (as described in section III.C.1 of this
preamble) would remove the differences in the emission sources reported
by facilities in one industry segment and not the other. The addition
of calculation methodologies for specific emission sources that would
be calculated and reported by facilities in both industry segments
would result in fewer differences between the emissions reported under
the two industry segments.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Proposed amendments described throughout the remainder of
this preamble would reduce the differences in calculation
methodologies (e.g., see sections III.O and III.P of this preamble),
but there are still expected to be differences even if all the
proposed amendments are finalized. The differences in calculation
methodologies that would remain are due to differences in the types
of operations and other factors such as the size of the ``facility''
between the two industry segments. In particular, facilities in the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry
segment can be geographically dispersed, and as such, some
measurement methodologies may be optional rather than required. In
addition, the combustion emissions for facilities in the Onshore
Natural Gas Processing industry segment are reported under subpart
C, while the combustion emissions for facilities in the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry segment
are reported under subpart W.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NSPS OOOOa defines ``natural gas processing plant (gas plant)'' as
any processing site engaged in the extraction of NGLs from field gas,
fractionation of mixed NGLs to natural gas products, or both. The
definition specifies that a Joule-Thompson valve, a dew point
depression valve, or an isolated or standalone Joule-Thompson skid is
not a natural gas processing plant. There are two minor editorial
differences between the proposed definition in 40 CFR 98.230(a) and the
definition in NSPS OOOOa. First, instead of defining a natural gas
processing ``plant,'' as in the definition in NSPS OOOOa, we are
proposing to describe what is meant by ``natural gas processing'' so
that the structure of 40 CFR 98.230(a)(3) is consistent with the
structure of all of the other industry segment definitions in 40 CFR
98.230(a). Second, the definition in NSPS OOOOa refers to
``extraction'' of NGLs from natural gas, but this term is not defined.
Thus, we are proposing to retain the term ``forced extraction'' in the
current provisions of 40 CFR 98.230(a)(3) and proposing to revise the
definition of this term slightly in 40 CFR 98.238. The current
definition of ``forced extraction'' specifies that forced extraction
does not include ``portable dewpoint suppression skids.'' We are
proposing to revise the definition to indicate instead that forced
extraction does not include ``a Joule-Thomson valve, a dewpoint
depression valve, or an isolated or standalone Joule-Thomson skid.''
These changes would make the definition of ``forced extraction'' in
subpart W consistent with the language in the definition of a natural
gas processing plant in NSPS OOOOa.
The proposed amendments to the processes that are considered
``onshore natural gas processing'' are not expected to decrease overall
coverage of the GHGRP for the petroleum and natural gas systems
industry, although we anticipate that some operations currently being
reported as standalone facilities under the Onshore Natural Gas
Processing industry segment would transition to reporting as part of
either existing or new facilities under the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry segment, while some
operations currently being reported as part of Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting facilities would transition to
reporting as standalone facilities under the Onshore Natural Gas
Processing industry segment. For example, based on reported data for
RY2020, about 19 percent of facilities reporting in the Onshore Natural
Gas Processing industry segment do not fractionate NGLs and report zero
NGLs received and leaving the facility. These facilities meet the
current definition of natural gas processing because they are
separating CO2 and/or hydrogen sulfide and/or they are
capturing CO2 separated from natural gas. These facilities
would not meet the proposed revised definition for natural gas
processing and instead, their emissions would be reported as part of
either existing or new onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities. In most cases, we anticipate that operations at a
facility that was previously classified by a reporter as a gas
processing facility would be incorporated into an existing gathering
and boosting facility that has been subject to reporting, and the total
emissions from the expanded gathering and boosting facility would be
similar to the emissions that would have been reported by the separate
facilities under the existing industry segment definitions. In cases
where a former gas processing facility is located in a basin where the
owner or operator does not have an existing reporting gathering and
boosting facility, we expect that a new gathering and boosting facility
including the former gas processing facility would be created because
the emissions from the former gas processing facility alone would
exceed the reporting threshold of 25,000 mtCO2e. If the same
owner or operator has other gathering and boosting operations in the
same basin that have emissions less than 25,000 mtCO2e, then
the new gathering and boosting facility could result in increased
coverage of the industry segment and greater total reported emissions
than would be reported under
[[Page 50296]]
the current industry segment definitions.
The proposed revised definition for natural gas processing also
does not include the 25 MMscf per day threshold for facilities that
separate NGLs from natural gas using forced extraction but do not
fractionate NGLs. Under the current definition of onshore natural gas
processing, processing plants that do not fractionate gas liquids and
generally operate close to the 25 MMscf per day threshold may be
natural gas processing facilities one year and then part of an onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting facility the next
year. As noted earlier in this section, the two potentially applicable
segments currently report emissions from different sources and with
different calculation methods. As a result of the current definition,
it can be difficult to track the reporting status of a facility from
one year to the next, and it can be difficult to assess and verify
reporting trends for an individual facility across reporting years.
Under the revised proposed definition, these sites that separate NGLs
from natural gas using forced extraction but do not fractionate NGLs
and generally operate close to 25 MMscf per day would be considered
natural gas processing regardless of their throughput level, so they
would have the certainty of knowing they would be subject to reporting
as natural gas processing facilities every year. As a result, removing
the 25 MMscf per day threshold is expected to increase the number of
sites that consistently report as facilities under the Onshore Natural
Gas Processing industry segment instead of sometimes reporting as part
of a facility that reports under the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting industry segment. We request comment on the
impact the proposed changes would have on the number of reporting
facilities and emissions from both the Onshore Natural Gas Processing
and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry
segments. We also request comment on any other advantages or
disadvantages to finalizing the proposed changes.
4. Applicability of Proposed Subpart B to Subpart W Facilities
In the supplemental proposal to the 2022 Proposed Rule (88 FR
32852, May 22, 2023), the EPA is proposing to add subpart B to part 98
(Metered, Non-fuel, Purchased Energy Consumption by Stationary Sources)
for reporting the quantity of metered electricity and thermal energy
purchased. The EPA's intent is for this new subpart to apply to
facilities that are required to report direct emissions under another
subpart of the GHGRP, including those facilities in subpart W industry
segments that have a unique definition of facility in 40 CFR 98.238 and
a reporting threshold specified in 40 CFR 98.231. Therefore, the EPA is
proposing to add 40 CFR 98.232(n) (and a reference to this new
paragraph from the introductory text of 40 CFR 98.232) to clarify the
intent for subpart W reporters to also report under subpart B,
consistent with section II.D of this preamble.
B. Other Large Release Events
We are proposing to add an additional emissions source, referred to
as ``other large release events,'' to capture maintenance or abnormal
emission events that are not fully accounted for using existing methods
in subpart W, consistent with section II.A of this preamble. Numerous
studies have indicated that other large release events, commonly
referred to as ``super-emitters,'' significantly contribute to the
emissions from oil and gas facilities and that the current subpart W
understates oil and gas emissions because there is a lack of
calculation and reporting requirements for many of these large
events.\20\ We proposed to include calculation and reporting
requirements for other large release events in the 2022 Proposed Rule,
and this proposal regarding other large release events is very similar
to the 2022 Proposed Rule. The primary difference in this proposal is
that we are including an instantaneous CH4 emission rate
threshold of 100 kg/hr, in addition to the 250 mtCO2e per
event threshold we previously proposed, so there are two proposed
emissions thresholds for determining whether emissions from other large
release events must be reported. We are also proposing to expand the
definition of other large release events to include planned releases,
such as those associated with maintenance activities for which there
are not emission calculation procedures in subpart W. Emptying,
degassing, and cleaning a tank is an example of a maintenance activity
for which emissions would need to be reported under this proposal (if
the emissions exceed the thresholds for an other large release event)
that would not have been required to report under the 2022 Proposed
Rule's definition of other large release event.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See, e.g., Zavala-Araiza, D., et al., 2017, Super-emitters
in natural gas infrastructure are caused by abnormal process
conditions, Nat. Commun. 8, 14012, https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14012; Alavarez, R.A., et al., 2018, Assessment of methane
emissions from the U.S. oil and gas supply chain, Science 361(6398)
186-188, https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aar7204; Chen,
Y., et al., 2022, Quantifying regional methane emissions in the New
Mexico Permian Basin with a comprehensive aerial survey,
Environmental Science & Technology 56(7) 4317-4323, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.1c06458. Available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Most of the emission sources and methodologies included in subpart
W characterize emissions that routinely occur at oil and gas facilities
as part of their normal operations, including routinely occurring large
emission events, such as blowdowns. While some sources covered by
subpart W methodologies, such as equipment leaks, may represent
``malfunctioning'' equipment, these sources are ubiquitous across the
oil and gas sector and have been studied and characterized and these
types of events have been incorporated into existing subpart W source
methodologies. On the other hand, there have been several large,
atypical release events at oil and gas facilities over the last few
years where it was difficult to sufficiently include these emissions in
annual GHGRP reports. For example, a storage wellhead leak at Aliso
Canyon released approximately 100,000 metric tons (mt) of
CH4 between October 2015 and February 2016 \21\ and a well
blowout in Ohio released an estimated 40,000 to 60,000 tons of
CH4 in a 20-day period in 2018.\22\ The emissions from these
types of releases were not well represented using the existing
calculation methodologies in subpart W because these were not common or
predictable events.\23\ For example, subpart W includes a default
emission factor for underground gas storage wellheads to estimate
emissions from leaking storage wellheads; however, the data upon which
that emission factor is based do not include a release of the magnitude
estimated for Aliso Canyon
[[Page 50297]]
because this type of malfunction did not occur during the measurement
study. Recent data summarizing release events from underground storage
facilities indicate that while the Aliso Canyon release was large, it
was not the largest release event from an underground storage facility
and that, over the past 75 years, there have been 129 release events
from underground storage facilities.\24\ The data showed emissions from
these release events are heavy-tailed with event emissions spanning 6
orders of magnitude, indicating that they would not likely be
accurately described by an emission factor. Rather than escalating the
population emission factor for all storage wellheads to account for
these releases, our assessment is that it would be more accurate for
the population emission factor to be based on typical frequency and
size of leaks that commonly occur and to track these uncommon, large
releases separately. Because these events can significantly contribute
to the total GHG emissions from this sector, we are proposing to add,
at 40 CFR 98.232, other large release events as an emission source for
which emissions must be calculated for every industry segment. We are
also proposing new calculation methods for estimating the GHG emissions
from other large release events in 40 CFR 98.233(y) and requirements
for reporting other large release events in 40 CFR 98.236(y). These
proposed additional calculation and reporting requirements would apply
to all subpart W industry segments and would improve the accuracy of
emissions reported under subpart W and enhance the overall quality of
the data collected under the GHGRP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ California Air Resources Board. 2016. Determination of
Total Methane Emissions from the Aliso Canyon Natural Gas Leak
Incident. Available at https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-07/aliso_canyon_methane_emissions-arb_final.pdf. Available in
the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
\22\ Pandey, S., et al., 2019. Satellite observations reveal
extreme methane leakage from a natural gas well blowout. Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences 116(52), 26376-26381. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1908712116. Available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
\23\ The EPA notes that the full emissions from these events
were included in the U.S. GHG Inventory based on the results of
multiple measurement studies. See U.S. EPA. Inventory of U.S.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks 1990-2020: Updates for Anomalous
Events including Well Blowout and Well Release Emissions. April
2022. Available at https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2022-04/2022_ghgi_update_-_blowouts.pdf and in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
\24\ Li, H.Z., et al., 2022. A national estimate of U.S.
underground natural gas storage incident emissions. Environ. Res.
Lett. 17(8) 084013. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ac8069.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The new calculation requirements being proposed rely on measurement
data, if available, or a combination of engineering estimates, process
knowledge, and best available data, when measurement data are not
available. The proposed calculation procedure consists of estimating
the amount of gas released and the composition of the released gas. The
amount of gas released would generally be calculated based on a
measured or estimated emission rate(s) and an event duration. We are
proposing that the start time of the duration must be determined based
on monitored process parameters, such as pressure or temperature, for
which sudden changes in the monitored parameter signals the start of
the event. If the monitored process parameters cannot identify the
start of the event, we are proposing that reporters must assume the
release started on the date of the most recent monitoring or
measurement survey that confirms the source was not emitting at the
rates above the other large release event reporting thresholds or
assume the duration of the event was 182 days (six months), whichever
duration is shorter. We are proposing the end time of the release must
be the date of the confirmed repair or confirmed cessation of
emissions. There may be events that span across two separate reporting
years. In this case, we are proposing that the volume of gas released
specific to each reporting year would be calculated and reported for
that reporting year starting with RY2025.
We request comment on the proposed default duration of 182 days (in
the absence of information on the start time). Studies on large
releases from oil and gas facilities commonly report that these
emissions are intermittent, with typical durations of several hours to
several days,\25\ but in many cases they may be significantly longer,
occurring for weeks or months.\26\ For many releases, such as
maintenance events, fires, explosions, and well blowouts, the reporter
would be able to identify the start and end time of an event. Other
releases may be identified via monitoring surveys or site inspections.
For these the start date can often be identified from process operating
records or previous monitoring results. For identifying the start date,
we are specifically proposing to allow monitoring or measurement
surveys to include methods specified in 40 CFR 98.234(a) through (d) as
well as advanced screening methods such as monitoring systems mounted
on vehicles, drones, helicopters, airplanes, or satellites capable of
identifying emissions at the thresholds specified for an other large
release event. However, there will be some releases for which the start
date cannot be determined. We selected a 182-day default duration as
this duration would include the majority of these types of events. We
expect that facilities will typically estimate durations based on the
monitoring of operating conditions, with more frequent monitoring or
measurement surveys, as described above, resulting in infrequent use of
the default. We recognize that the 182-day default duration may cause
revisions to reports submitted for previous reporting years in some
cases; however, we expect that these revisions would be made prior to
the final verification of the reports for a given reporting year and
should not have significant implications on being able to calculate the
event emissions and submit revised reports, if needed, prior to the
time waste emission filings, if applicable, are due. We request comment
on the 182-day default duration and ability to revise, if necessary,
subpart W reports prior to the final verification of reports for a
given reporting year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See, e.g., Chen, et al., Quantifying Regional Methane
Emissions in the New Mexico Permian Basin with a Comprehensive
Aerial Survey. Environmental Science & Technology (Vol. 56, Issue 7,
pp. 4317-4323), available at https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.1c06458. 2022; Wang, et al., Multiscale Methane Measurements
at Oil and Gas Facilities Reveal Necessary Frameworks for Improved
Emissions Accounting. Environmental Science & Technology (Vol. 56,
Issue 20, pp. 14743-14752), available at https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.2c06211. 2022. Available in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
\26\ See, e.g., Frequently Asked Questions: Aliso Canyon Gas
Storage Facility. Public Utilities Commission, State of California,
January 26, 2021. https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/regulatory-services/safety/gas-safety-and-reliability-branch/aliso-canyon-well-failure;
Cusworth, et al., 2021, Multisatellite imaging of a gas well blowout
enables quantification of total methane emissions. Geophysical
Research Letters, 48, e2020GL090864. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL090864; and Maasakkers, J.D., et al., 2019. Reconstructing and
quantifying methane emissions from the full duration of a 38-day
natural gas well blowout using space-based observations. Remote
Sensing of Environment. 112755. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2021.112755. Available in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We also request comment on using other default durations.
Specifically, we request comment on using a 91-day (3-month) default
duration rather than 182-day duration, as well as on other potential
default durations. We seek information to support default duration
assumptions. We request comment on whether a 91-day default duration
would be reasonable. We also request comment on using the beginning of
the calendar year as the default duration. Using the beginning of the
year as the default duration would eliminate issues regarding potential
revisions to previously submitted reports, but it would lead to
inconsistent reporting of emissions from similar types of events based
on when the event occurred (or was identified) in the calendar year.
For other large release events with an identifiable start date in
reporting year 1 and identifiable end date in reporting year 2, some
reporters may know of the release on the day it started and other
reporters may not identify the release until late in the overall
duration. If the reporter knows of the event in reporting year 1, then
the reporter would be obligated to report the emissions that occurred
from this event in each
[[Page 50298]]
reporting year. However, if the reporter does not become aware of the
release until the second reporting year, using the start of the year as
the beginning of the default duration would result in the reporter only
being required to report the emissions from the other large release
event that occurred in reporting year 2, resulting in underreported
emissions.
We also considered hybrid alternatives where the reporter would
have to evaluate company records to identify the start date and use the
actual start date if known but use the start of the calendar year if
not known. While there is an incentive for the reporter to review
records in reporting year 2 to identify if the release event began
prior to the first day of the calendar year, there would not be a
similar incentive for the reporter to review records in the previous
reporting year (reporting year 1). Instead, if waste emission charges
may apply, there would be an incentive to simply use the default of the
beginning of the year and not review records past this date. Under this
hybrid alternative, we would need to specify how many months of records
reporters would be required to review to determine the start date of
the event. We considered both 182 and 365 days of records required to
be reviewed under this alternative hybrid approach. After considering
these various scenarios, we selected the 182-day maximum duration and
event reporting across reporting years to be the most accurate and
reasonable option, but we request comment on the other options
considered as described in this section. We also seek comment on other
options that may be used to obtain accurate reporting of other large
release event emissions that span reporting years.
We recognize that some natural gas releases, such as explosions or
fires, will combust or partially combust the natural gas released. We
are proposing that reporters must estimate the portion of the total
volume of natural gas released that was combusted in the explosion or
fire in order to determine the average composition of GHG released to
the atmosphere during the event. For the portion of natural gas
released via combustion in an explosion or fire, we are proposing a
maximum combustion efficiency of 92 percent be assumed. This maximum
combustion efficiency is consistent with the combustion efficiency we
are proposing for flares that are not continuously monitored as
described in section III.N.1 of this preamble. We recognize that
because these releases are not through engineered nozzles that can be
designed to promote mixing and combustion efficiency, the combustion
efficiency of these releases can be highly variable. Reporters may use
a lower combustion efficiency but may not use higher combustion
efficiency than 92 percent for natural gas released directly in an
explosion or fire. We request comment on these proposed provisions. We
request comment and supporting data on the proposed maximum combustion
efficiency of 92 percent for the portion of the total volume of natural
gas released via explosion or fire.
The proposed requirement to calculate and report GHG emissions from
other large release events would be limited to events that release at
least 250 mtCO2e per event or have a CH4 emission
rate of 100 kg/hr or greater at any point in time. The 250
mtCO2e per event threshold is equivalent to approximately
500,000 standard cubic feet (scf) of pipeline quality natural gas. For
events that span two reporting years, we are proposing that these
thresholds apply to the event, not a portion of the event within a
given reporting year. We selected these proposed thresholds to capture
reporting for large emission events, such as well blowouts, well
releases, and large pressure relief venting.
In order to establish the mass CO2e per event reporting
threshold, we assessed other emission sources that could qualify as
large. Specifically, we considered completions of hydraulically
fractured wells that are not controlled (i.e., not performed using
reduced emission completions (RECs)) to be large emissions events. RECs
are completions where gas flowback emissions from the gas outlet of the
separator that are otherwise vented are captured, cleaned, and routed
to the flow line or collection system, re-injected into the well or
another well, used as an on-site fuel source, or used for other useful
purpose that a purchased fuel or raw material would serve, with de
minimis direct venting to the atmosphere. Based on analysis of GHGRP
data for wells that are not RECs and that vent, the U.S. GHG Inventory
developed an average emission factor of about 360 mtCO2e per
event for these completions.\27\ Because this is an average emission
factor, some uncontrolled hydraulically fractured completions will be
below this average and some above. From this assessment, we considered
250 mtCO2e to be a reasonable emissions threshold for a
``large'' event.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ U.S. EPA. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and
Sinks 1990-2014. EPA 430-R-16-002. April 2016. Available at https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks-1990-2014 and in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id.
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While 250 mtCO2e is much lower than the emissions from
the Aliso Canyon or Ohio well blowout releases, we determined that a
250 mtCO2e threshold would be needed to capture most well
blowouts. There are limited data to quantify an ``average'' well
blowout, but the 2021 U.S. GHG Inventory uses an oil well blowout
emission factor of 2.5 MMscf per event. As this is an average, many
well blowouts may be less than this average value. The 250
mtCO2e threshold is approximately equivalent to 500,000 scf
of natural gas, which aligns with the lower range of well blowouts
expected based on the average emission factor of 2.5 MMscf per event.
This value also aligns with the definitions of ``major release'' in New
Mexico Administrative Code (NMAC) section 19.15.29.7, which requires
reporting under NMAC section 19.15.29.10.
We also tentatively find that the proposed 250 mtCO2e
threshold (approximately equivalent to 500,000 scf natural gas release)
is a reasonable threshold for requiring individual assessments of
releases. In subpart Y (Petroleum Refineries), we established event-
specific emission calculation requirements for startup, shutdown, or
malfunction releases to a flare exceeding 500,000 scf per day (40 CFR
98.253(b)(1)(iii)). While the subpart Y threshold is per day rather
than per event, it is also specific to flared emissions. For flared
emissions to exceed a 250 mtCO2e threshold, approximately 4
MMscf of natural gas would have to be released to the flare, which is
well above the subpart Y ``per day'' threshold for flares. Thus, we
propose that the 250 mtCO2e per event threshold is an
appropriate size threshold for requiring event-specific emission
calculations to be performed. More information regarding our review and
characterization of types of other large release events is included in
the subpart W TSD, available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234. Emissions from smaller or routine release
events would still be reported, as applicable, under the source-
specific calculation and reporting requirements in subpart W.
We are also proposing a 100 kg/hr CH4 emission threshold
to align with the super-emitter response program proposed in the NSPS
OOOOb. These emissions are generally intermittent, with widely varying
durations. Releases from maintenance activities, for example, may occur
for only a few hours, but these large, short events can
[[Page 50299]]
significantly contribute to a facility's emissions. The proposed
emission rate threshold for a super-emitter emissions event under NSPS
OOOOb provides a means to get information for these large, shorter
duration releases. Therefore, we are proposing that the 100 kg/hr
CH4 emission threshold be applied as an instantaneous
emissions rate threshold, such that any emissions from any other large
release event that emits CH4 at a rate of 100 kg/hr or more
at any point in time must be reported.
With a combination of both a cumulative mass emissions per event
threshold and the instantaneous 100 kg/hr CH4 emission rate
threshold, the EPA is requesting comment whether a larger cumulative
mass emissions per event threshold is reasonable. Specifically, we
understand that the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA) includes, in the definition of ``incident'' at
49 CFR 191.3, an ``unintentional estimated loss of three million cubic
feet or more.'' As many subpart W facilities are required to keep
records of these incidents, we request comment on the use of a 1,500
mtCO2e per event threshold, which would be approximately
equivalent to a 3 million cubic feet release of natural gas. We request
comment on whether the CO2e mass threshold is appropriate
for considering emissions from events such as fires, or if the
threshold should be expressed as a loss of 3 million cubic feet or more
of natural gas, whether directly emitted or partially burned via a
fire. We also request comment on whether these thresholds should be
assessed per event within the calendar year, rather than just per
event. We propose that the thresholds for other large release events
would be evaluated on a per event basis because then all events are
considered consistently regardless of when they occur. For example,
consider a 400 mtCO2e event that spans two calendar years,
with 200 mtCO2e released in each calendar year. As proposed,
the reporter would be required to report the other large release event
in each of the corresponding reporting years. If, however, the
thresholds were instead evaluated on a per event within a calendar year
basis, this emissions event would not qualify as an other large release
event in either reporting year. There may be cases where limiting the
thresholds to events to within a calendar year could reduce the number
of events reported without significantly missing emissions and
potentially limiting the number of report resubmissions. For example,
if the 400 mtCO2e event that spanned 2 calendar years
resulted in 40 mtCO2e of emission in reporting year 1 and
360 mtCO2e of emissions in reporting year 2, then if the
thresholds were evaluated on a per event per calendar year basis, only
the emissions in reporting year 2 would be required to be reported.
Under the thresholds as proposed, the 40 mtCO2e of emission
in reporting year 1 would be required to be reported. Depending on when
the other large release event was identified and start date determined,
this may require resubmission of a previously submitted subpart W
report. We request comment on whether the other large release event
thresholds should be limited to releases within a single calendar year.
We are proposing a definition of ``other large release events'' in
40 CFR 98.238 to clarify the types of releases that must be
characterized for this new emissions source and specify that other
large release events include, but are not limited to, maintenance
events, well blowouts, well releases, releases from equipment rupture,
fire, or explosions. Currently, there are no calculation methodologies
or reporting requirements for these types of large releases in subpart
W. The proposed definition would also include large pressure relief
valve releases from process equipment other than onshore production and
onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting storage tanks
that are not included in the blowdown definition. The proposed
definition of other large release events excludes pressure relief valve
releases from hydrocarbon liquids storage tanks because the calculation
methodology for storage tanks is expected to account for these releases
via either the proposed requirements to account for collection
efficiency when emissions are observed from the thief hatch or the
additional term in the emissions equation for when there is a stuck
dump valve. While subpart W currently includes emission factors for
pressure relief devices, these equipment leak emission factors only
account for leaks past a pressure relief valve that is in the closed
position, not releases from the complete opening of these valves. The
proposed definition specifies that pressure relief valve releases from
onshore production and onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting storage tanks would not be considered other large release
events because the calculation methodology for these storage tanks
currently assumes all flash gas will be emitted. As noted in section
III.K of this preamble, pressure relief emission releases from onshore
production and onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
storage tanks generally occur from the thief hatch and these releases
must be accounted for when calculating the fraction of flash gas that
is recovered or sent to a flare, if applicable. A more detailed
discussion of certain other emissions events we have identified and
expect to be subject to the ``other large release events'' proposed
amendments is included in the subpart W TSD available in the docket for
this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
As part of the proposed definition of ``other large release
events'' in 40 CFR 98.238, we are also proposing that other large
release events include releases from equipment for which the existing
calculation methodologies in subpart W would significantly
underestimate the episodic nature of these emissions. For example,
subpart W contains population emission factors and leaker emission
factors for estimating equipment leak emissions for storage wellheads.
Thus, it is possible to argue that subpart W includes calculation
methodologies for the equipment responsible for the Aliso Canyon
release. However, the calculation methodologies in subpart W do not
accurately estimate emissions from such an uncharacteristically large
release event because such events are infrequent such that they may not
exist when measurement studies are conducted. Additionally, if we
proposed to instead revise the emission factors under the existing
methodologies to account for such an event, the resulting calculation
would likely yield erroneously high emissions from normal operations
for most reporting facilities. Thus, we determined that it is more
accurate for facility-specific reporting to account for these large
releases on a per event basis. Therefore, if a single leak or event has
emissions that exceed the emissions estimated by an applicable
methodology included in subpart W by 250 mtCO2e or more on a
per event basis, or 100 kg/hr of CH4 or more as an
instantaneous rate at any time during an event, we are proposing that
such releases would be included in the definition of ``other large
release events'' and that reporters would be required to calculate and
report the GHG emissions from these events using the proposed
requirements for other large release events. We are proposing in 40 CFR
98.233(y)(1)(ii) that this provision does not require the direct
measurement of every release, such as measurement of every leak
identified during an equipment leak monitoring survey. However, we are
proposing to require that if the owner or operator has credible
information that demonstrates
[[Page 50300]]
that the release meets or exceeds or may reasonably be anticipated to
meet or exceed (or to have met or have exceeded) the emissions
calculated by the source-specific methodology by 250 mtCO2e
or more, or 100 kg/hr of CH4 or more, then the release must
be quantified and, if the thresholds are confirmed to be exceeded,
reported as an other large release event. We consider credible
information would include, but is not limited to, data from monitoring
or measurement data completed by the facility, information from
notifications as a potential super-emitter emissions event under the
super-emitter provisions of NSPS OOOOb at proposed 40 CFR 60.5371b or
data of similar quality as that provided through the provisions of NSPS
OOOOb at proposed 40 CFR 60.5371b that is received by the facility. We
anticipate that we would take into consideration what is included in
the final NSPS OOOOb regarding such notifications in the types of
information that would be considered credible for these provisions in
subpart W, if finalized. The owner or operator would be required to
consider all credible information they have regarding the release in
complying with this requirement.
Further, we are proposing to define the terms ``well release'' and
``well blowout'' in 40 CFR 98.238 to assist reporting facilities with
differentiating between these types of release events that could
potentially occur at wells. We find that a well blowout is generally
distinguished by a complete loss of well control for a long duration of
time and a well release is characterized as a short period of
uncontrolled release (not the controlled pre-separation stage of well
flowback in a hydraulically fractured completion) followed by a period
of controlled release in which control techniques were successfully
implemented.
Finally, we are proposing a series of reporting requirements in 40
CFR 98.236(y) related to the type, location, duration, calculations,
and emissions of each ``other large release event.'' Specifically, we
are proposing that reporters provide the location, a description of the
release (from a specified list that includes an ``other (specify)''
option for releases that are not described well with the list
provided), a description of the technology or method used to identify
the release, volume of gas released, volume fractions of CO2
and CH4 in the gas released, and CO2 and
CH4 emissions for each ``other large release event.'' We are
also proposing that reporters would provide the start date and time of
the release, duration of the release, and the method used to determine
the start date and time (options would include a pressure monitor, a
temperature monitor, other monitored process parameter, most recent
monitoring or measurement survey showing no large release, or the
default assumption that the release started 182 days prior to the
documented end of the release (this would be the required assumption if
they do not have monitored data associated with the release). We are
also proposing that reporters provide a general description of the
event and indicate whether the ``other large release event'' was also
identified as a potential super-emitter emissions event under the
super-emitter provisions of NSPS OOOOb at 40 CFR 60.5371b or an
applicable approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR
part 62.
We are proposing that reporters that received super-emitter
emissions event notifications would be required to report information
on each release notification received, including latitude and longitude
of the release, whether the release was received under the super-
emitter provisions of NSPS OOOOb at 40 CFR 60.5371b or an applicable
approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62 or
another notifier. If the notification is from another notifier, the
reporter would provide the name of the notifier, the remote sensing
method used, the date and time of the measurement, the measured
emission rate, and uncertainty bounds on the emission rate, if provided
by the notifier. We are also proposing that, for each notification
received, facilities would report the type of event resulting in the
emissions (e.g., normal operations, a planned maintenance event,
leaking equipment, malfunctioning equipment or device, or undetermined
cause) and an indication of whether the emissions identified from the
event are included as an other large release event or as another source
required to be reported under subpart W. If the emissions identified
via the notification are not included in emissions reported under
subpart W, we are proposing that the reporter provide a reason (e.g.,
the location of the emissions as provided in the notification do not
belong to the facility; the emissions could not be verified or
corroborated during site inspection or facility data records;
information was determined to not be credible and basis for the
determination). This information would support EPA verification and
ensure accuracy of the emissions reported under other large release
events.
As part of the GHGRP verification process, the EPA reviews data
provided in submitted reports to identify potential errors in the
reported data based on the different values reported and the
calculation methodology. The EPA requests comment on the need to
establish additional requirements for third-party notifiers and the
verification of third-party notifications. Generally, verification of
GHGRP reports is conducted while a facility is entering data into the
e-GGRT system and after the report is officially submitted. The EPA
requests comment on the need for EPA verification support or an advance
verification process during the reporting year for assessments of
third-party notifications. Currently, facilities with questions about
reporting requirements submit inquiries via the e-GGRT Help Desk to get
questions answered regarding monitoring or reporting requirements. We
request comment on whether this existing process is adequate for
supporting questions regarding individual third-party notifications
received by a reporter and request suggestions on how the EPA
verification process could better support the other large release event
calculation and reporting requirements.
The supplemental proposal for NSPS OOOOb and EG OOOOc, as described
in section II of this preamble, included a matrix for alternative
screening approaches for fugitive emissions from well sites and
compressor stations that would allow the use of advanced measurement
technologies to detect emissions under the proposed NSPS OOOOb and EG
OOOOc. As part of that proposal, the EPA also requested comment on how
to evaluate and design a requirement for owners and operators to
investigate and remediate large emission events, which could include
the use of alternative screening techniques and advanced measurement
technologies, all of which, if finalized, could potentially be used to
identify ``other large release events'' under subpart W. While some
methods that could be used to identify and estimate the magnitude of
these ``other large release events,'' such as monitors installed on
mobile vehicles or aircraft or CH4 satellite imagery, would
not be specifically included as measurement methods listed in 40 CFR
98.234 of subpart W, these methods may be used to quantify the
emissions release for ``other large release events'' under the
``engineering estimates'' and ``best available data'' provisions of the
proposed calculation methodology. To improve the EPA's understanding of
the
[[Page 50301]]
technologies and methods used to identify reported ``other large
release events,'' including the impact of periodic screenings with
advanced measurement technologies on the identification of large
release events, we are proposing reporting provisions that would
require reporters to indicate whether each ``other large release
event'' was identified as part of compliance with NSPS OOOOb or the
applicable state plan or applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62.
C. New and Additional Emission Sources
Sources of emissions that are required to be reported to subpart W
are listed in 40 CFR 98.232 for each industry segment, with the
methodology and reporting requirements for each source provided in 40
CFR 98.233 and 98.236, respectively. The EPA finalized this list of
emission sources for each of the eight original industry segments as
part of the 2010 Final Rule and identified emission sources for the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting and Onshore
Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline industry segments when those segments
were added to subpart W in 2015 (80 FR 64262, October 22, 2015). Per
the TSD for the 2010 Final Rule (hereafter referred to as the ``2010
subpart W TSD''),\28\ there were several factors that impacted the
EPA's decision on whether an emissions source should be included for
reporting. These factors included how significant the contribution of
the source was to the U.S. GHG Inventory, the type of emission expected
from the source (vented versus fugitive), the best practice monitoring
methods available to measure emissions from the source, accessibility
of the emission source, geographical dispersion of the emission source,
and the applicability of population versus leaker factors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting from the Petroleum and
Natural Gas Systems Industry: Background Technical Support. November
2010. Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0923-3610; also available in
the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA has evaluated the sources covered under subpart W in
comparison with present-day inventories of the oil and gas industry,
such as the 2022 U.S. GHG Inventory \29\ and the American Petroleum
Institute (API) 2021 Compendium of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Methodologies for the Natural Gas and Oil Industry (2021 API
Compendium).\30\ The EPA also reviewed stakeholder feedback, including
public comments from the 2022 Proposed Rule, on missing sources of
emissions from subpart W. As a result, the EPA is proposing to add
several emission sources identified in this review that are anticipated
to have a meaningful impact on reported emissions, are commonplace in
the oil and gas industry, and/or have existing emission calculation
methodologies and reporting provisions in the current subpart W
regulatory text. For some of these emission sources, discussed in
additional detail in section III.C.1 of this preamble, reporting is
currently required for some, but not all, industry segments in which
they exist. Other proposed emission sources, discussed in additional
detail in sections III.C.2 through 5 of this preamble, are not
currently required to be reported for any industry segments in which
they exist. The proposed addition of sources to subpart W would be
expected to enhance the overall quality of the data collected under the
GHGRP and improve the accuracy of total emissions reported from
facilities, consistent with Congress' direction in the IRA and section
II.A of this preamble.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-
2020. U.S. EPA. April 2022. Available at https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks-1990-2020 and in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2023-0234.
\30\ Compendium of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Methodologies For
The Natural Gas And Oil Industry. Produced by URS Corporation for
American Petroleum Institute. November 2021. Available at https://www.api.org/-/media/files/policy/esg/ghg/2021-api-ghg-compendium-110921.pdf. Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id.
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following sections detail the proposed additions of emission
sources to subpart W.
1. Current Subpart W Emission Sources Proposed for Additional Industry
Segments
Upon review of the U.S. GHG Inventory and the 2021 API Compendium,
as well as other publications,\31\ the EPA determined that several of
the emission sources included in at least one industry segment in
subpart W are not currently required to be reported by facilities in
all the industry segments in which those sources exist. As such,
consistent with section II.A of this preamble, we are proposing to add
requirements to report CO2, CH4, and nitrous
oxide (N2O) emissions (as applicable for the source type)
from the following sources under 40 CFR 98.232 and 98.236(a): \32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ For example, American Petroleum Institute (API). Liquefied
Natural Gas (LNG) Operations Consistent Methodology for Estimating
Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Prepared for API by The LEVON Group, LLC.
Version 1.0, May 2015. Available in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
\32\ It should be noted that the EPA did not identify any
subpart W emission sources missing from the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry segment.
Onshore petroleum and natural gas production: Blowdown vent
stacks
Onshore natural gas processing: Natural gas pneumatic device
venting, Hydrocarbon liquids and produced water storage tank emissions
Onshore natural gas transmission compression: Dehydrator vents
Underground natural gas storage: Dehydrator vents, Blowdown
vent stacks, Condensate storage tanks
LNG storage: Blowdown vent stacks, Acid gas removal unit vents
LNG import and export equipment: Acid gas removal unit vents
Natural gas distribution: Natural gas pneumatic device
venting, Blowdown vent stacks
Onshore natural gas transmission pipeline: Equipment leaks at
transmission company interconnect metering-regulating stations,
Equipment leaks at farm tap and/or direct sale metering-regulating
stations, Transmission pipeline equipment leaks
We are also proposing several revisions that would facilitate
implementation of the proposal to require reporting of these emission
sources from additional industry segments. We are proposing to revise
the name of the current emission source type ``onshore production and
onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting storage
tanks'' to ``hydrocarbon liquids and produced water storage tanks'' and
revise ``storage tank vented emissions'' to ``hydrocarbon liquids and
produced water storage tank emissions'' throughout subpart W. The
proposed removal of the reference to ``onshore production and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting'' would reflect a more
appropriate name corresponding to the proposed addition of the
reporting of these storage tank emissions for the Onshore Natural Gas
Processing industry segment; the addition of ``produced water'' to the
name is discussed in detail in section III.C.3 of this preamble.
Additionally, we are proposing to revise the emission source type name
in 40 CFR 98.233(k) and 98.236(k) from ``transmission storage tanks''
to ``condensate storage tanks,'' which would reflect a more appropriate
name corresponding to the proposed addition of the reporting of these
storage tank emissions for the
[[Page 50302]]
Underground Natural Gas Storage industry segment.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ Revisions are also proposed to 40 CFR 98.232(e)(3) to
reference the source as ``condensate storage tanks.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are also proposing revisions to the calculation methodologies
and/or emissions reporting structure for each of these emission source/
industry segment combinations that would be needed in 40 CFR 98.233 and
98.236, respectively. For industry segments for which we are proposing
to additionally require reporting of emissions from AGR vents,
dehydrator vents, hydrocarbon liquids and produced water storage tank
emissions, and condensate storage tank emissions, we are proposing that
reporters would use the same calculation methods and report the same
information as reporters in the industry segments in which those source
types are already reported. For these sources, the EPA is not aware of
differences in the operation of the emission sources between industry
segments that would necessitate separate calculation methodologies. The
remainder of this section describes additional proposed amendments to
40 CFR 98.233.
For the proposed addition of natural gas pneumatic device venting
as an emission source for the Onshore Natural Gas Processing industry
segment, we are proposing that those facilities would use the proposed
calculation methodologies as described in section III.E of this
preamble. For any reporters to the Onshore Natural Gas Processing
industry segment that would use proposed Calculation Methodology 3, the
emission factors we are proposing are the same as the proposed revised
emission factors for the Onshore Natural Gas Transmission Compression
and Underground Natural Gas Storage industry segments. As noted in the
subpart W TSD (available in the docket), the data available to develop
emission factors for the Onshore Natural Gas Processing industry
segment are limited, and because operations defined as being part of
these three industry segments are similar and can occur at the same
facilities, the EPA has historically applied the same population and
leaker emission factors to these three segments (e.g., equipment
leaks). See section III.E of this preamble for additional details about
the proposed calculation methodologies.
As noted earlier in this section, we are proposing to add blowdown
vent stack reporting to the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production, Underground Natural Gas Storage, LNG Storage, and Natural
Gas Distribution industry segments. Subpart W currently requires
reporting of blowdowns either using flow meter measurements (existing
40 CFR 98.233(i)(3)) or using unique physical volume calculations by
equipment or event types (existing 40 CFR 98.233(i)(2)). There are two
lists of equipment or event types. One applies to the Onshore Natural
Gas Processing, Onshore Natural Gas Transmission Compression, LNG
Import and Export Equipment, and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting segments (proposed 40 CFR 98.233(i)(2)(iv)(A),
as discussed in section III.J.2 of this preamble). The other list of
equipment or event types (in proposed 40 CFR 98.233(i)(2)(iv)(B), as
discussed in section III.J.2 of this preamble) was developed for the
Onshore Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline industry segment when that
segment was added to subpart W in 2015 (80 FR 64275, October 22, 2015).
To allow reporters in the new industry segments to calculate emissions
by equipment or event types, the EPA is proposing to specify the
appropriate list of equipment or event types. We are proposing that
facilities in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production,
Underground Natural Gas Storage, and LNG Storage industry segments
following the methodology in 40 CFR 98.233(i)(2) would be required to
categorize blowdown vent stack emission events into the seven
categories provided in proposed 40 CFR 98.233(i)(2)(iv)(A), as the
types of blowdown vent stack emission events for these segments are
similar to those for the segments currently required to categorize
under this provision.
We are proposing that facilities in the Natural Gas Distribution
industry segment would be required to categorize blowdowns into the
eight categories listed in proposed 40 CFR 98.233(i)(2)(iv)(B), as the
types of blowdowns that occur in the Natural Gas Distribution industry
segment are expected to be pipeline blowdowns similar to those in the
Onshore Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline industry segment. We note
that during the early stages of our review of potential new sources, we
considered whether to add emissions from mishaps (dig-ins) in the
Natural Gas Distribution industry segment as a new emission source.
However, mishaps (dig-ins) are already included on the list of
equipment and event types in proposed 40 CFR 98.233(i)(2)(iv)(B),
specifically emergency shutdowns including pipeline incidents as
defined in 49 CFR 191.3. Therefore, a proposed amendment is not
necessary to include those events.
We are proposing one other amendment related to the calculation of
emissions from blowdown vent stacks. The EPA previously determined that
for reporters in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and
Boosting industry segment using the methodology provided in existing 40
CFR 98.233(i)(2) and equation W-14A, it is reasonable to allow
engineering estimates based on best available information when
determining temperature and pressure for emergency blowdowns, due to
the geographically dispersed nature of the facilities in this industry
segment. As discussed in section III.J.3 of this preamble, we are
proposing to also allow engineering estimates based on best available
information when determining temperature and pressure for emergency
blowdowns for the Onshore Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline industry
segment, as facilities in this industry segment are also geographically
dispersed. Due to the fact that facilities in the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production and Natural Gas Distribution industry segments
are similarly geographically dispersed, we are proposing that reporters
in those industry segments using the methodology provided in 40 CFR
98.233(i)(2) and equation W-14A would also be allowed to use
engineering estimates based on best available information available
when determining temperature and pressure for emergency blowdowns.
For the Onshore Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline industry segment,
as noted earlier in this section, we are proposing to add reporting of
emissions from equipment leaks from transmission pipelines,
transmission company interconnect metering-regulating stations, and
farm tap and/or direct sale stations. The EPA proposes to add these
sources to the calculation methodologies provided in 40 CFR 98.233(r),
with associated proposed updates to the variable definitions in
equation W-32A to include components in the Onshore Natural Gas
Transmission Pipeline industry segment. We are also proposing to add
default CH4 population emission factors for the components specified in
this paragraph at facilities in the Onshore Natural Gas Transmission
Pipeline industry segment in proposed Table W-5 of subpart W. The EPA
derived these proposed emission factors from the 1996 Gas Research
Institute (GRI)/EPA study Methane Emissions from the Natural Gas
Industry (hereafter referred to as ``the 1996 GRI/EPA study''),
specifically
[[Page 50303]]
Volumes 9 and 10.\34\ The precise derivation of the proposed emission
factors is discussed in more detail in the subpart W TSD, available in
the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234. We
are proposing that emissions from these components would be reported
using population emission factors, as we are not aware of any currently
available information or data that could be used to develop leaker
emission factors from transmission pipelines, transmission company
interconnect metering-regulating stations, or farm tap and/or direct
sale stations. We are seeking comments on whether there are study data
available which could be used to develop default leaker factors whereby
subpart W could include the use of equipment leak surveys, default
component-specific leaker emission factors, and the calculation method
in 40 CFR 98.233(q) an as option for transmission pipeline facilities
to quantify emissions from transmission company interconnect metering-
regulating stations, or farm tap and/or direct sale stations.
Similarly, we are seeking comment on whether an option to survey
components at transmission company interconnect metering-regulating
stations, or farm tap and/or direct sale stations using the existing
methods in subpart W in 40 CFR 98.234 (e.g., EPA Method 21, optical gas
imaging (OGI)) and directly measuring and reporting emissions
consistent with proposed 40 CFR 98.233(q)(3) should be provided; or
whether a methodology in which a multi-year leak survey cycle and the
application of either default emission factors or measurements used
with the methods provided in 40 CFR 98.233(q) should be provided
analogous to the methodology provided for above grade transmission-
distribution transfer stations should be provided. We are specifically
interested in comments on which approach would be preferred and the
supporting rationale.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ Methane Emissions from the Natural Gas Industry, Volume 9:
Underground Pipelines, Final Report (GRI-94/0257.26 and EPA-600/R-
96-080i) and Volume 10: Metering and Pressure Regulating Stations in
Natural Gas Transmission and Distribution, Final Report (GRI-94/
0257.27 and EPA-600/R-96-080j). Gas Research Institute and U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. June 1996. Available in the docket
for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Separately, concerning the quantification of emissions from
transmission pipelines, we are seeking comments on alternative methods
for surveying for equipment leaks as well as quantifying and reporting
emissions from these emission sources. We are specifically interested
in what survey techniques would be appropriate and why, including
supporting information on specific instruments and their detection
capabilities and whether certain methods would be more suitable for the
survey of pipeline leaks than others. We are also seeking comment on
what quantification techniques would be best suited for measuring
emissions from pipeline leaks and whether these techniques require
digging down to the pipeline in order to quantify emissions and also
verify pipeline characteristics. As an example, the EPA performed a
review of recent study data (Weller et al. 2020) that used an
alternative technology, namely AMLD, for the purposes of performing
surveys to identify leaks and as a method to quantify emissions from
pipeline leaks. For the reasons discussed in section III.Q.2 of this
preamble and discussed in more detail in the subpart W TSD, available
in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234,
we are not proposing amendments based on that study or use of that
technology. Instead, we are seeking comment on the scope and frequency
of leak detection surveys and measurements for transmission pipelines.
We are considering whether we should require annual surveys of the
entire pipeline system or whether a reduced frequency of survey (i.e.,
partial surveys over a multi-year survey cycle in which the entire
system is surveyed during the survey cycle and approximately equal
portions of the system are surveyed each year of the multi-year survey
cycle) is more appropriate and why. Finally, we are seeking comment on
whether facilities should be permitted to develop facility-specific
pipeline emission factors based on direct measurements and if so, what
the appropriate number of measurements should be for determining a
representative emission factor for each pipeline material including
supporting rationale.
2. Nitrogen Removal Units
The EPA is proposing to revise existing 40 CFR 98.232, 98.233(d),
and 98.236(d) to add calculation and reporting requirements for
CH4 emissions from nitrogen removal units used in the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production, Onshore Natural Gas
Processing, Onshore Petroleum Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting, LNG
Storage, and LNG Import and Export Equipment industry segments.
Nitrogen removal units remove nitrogen from the raw natural gas stream
to meet pipeline requirements and for compressing natural gas into
LNG.35 36 The nitrogen removal unit typically follows in
series after other process units that remove acid gas (e.g., CO2,
hydrogen sulfide), water, and heavy hydrocarbons. It is estimated that
11 percent of current daily production and 16 percent of known gas
reserves in the U.S. contain some nitrogen.\37\ Methane emissions from
nitrogen removal units occur from the vent and as fugitives. A nitrogen
removal unit separates the nitrogen gas from the CH4
resulting in an outlet CH4 stream that contains approximately 2 to 5
percent nitrogen\38\ and an outlet nitrogen stream that can contain 1
to 5 percent CH4 (EPA 2005).\39\ Optimization of the
nitrogen removal unit can reduce CH4 in the outlet nitrogen
stream to 2 percent (EPA 2005) and even to 1 percent CH4 by
volume.\40\ The EPA GasSTAR program already accounts for CH4
emissions from nitrogen removal unit vents and fugitives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ Kuo, J.C., K.H. Wang, C. Chen. Pros and cons of different
Nitrogen Removal Unit (NRU) technology. 7 (2012) 52-59. Journal of
Natural Gas Science and Engineering. July 2012. Available in the
docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
\36\ Park, J., D. Cho. Decision methodology for nitrogen removal
process in the LNG plant using analytic hierarchy process. Journal
of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry. 37 (2016) 75-83. 2016.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2023-0234.
\37\ Kuo 2012.
\38\ Weidert, D.J., and R.B. Hopewell. Holding the Key.
Hydrocarbon Engineering. August 2016. Available in the docket for
this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
\39\ EPA 2005. Optimizing Nitrogen Rejection Units, Lessons
Learned from Natural Gas STAR. Gas Processors Association, Devon
Energy, Enogex, Dynegy Midstream Services, and EPA's Natural Gas
STAR Program. Presented at Processors Technology Transfer Workshop.
April 22, 2005. Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
\40\ Nitrogen Rejection Unit Optimization, PRO Fact Sheet No.
905. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Partner Reported
Opportunities (PROs) for Reducing Methane Emissions. 2011. Available
in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-
0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based upon a 2002 field study conducted at four natural gas
processing plants,\41\ the EPA estimates that emissions from nitrogen
removal unit vents that would be reported to the GHGRP would be
approximately 2,400 mt CH4 per year. For more information on
the estimation of potential CH4 emissions from nitrogen
removal unit venting see the subpart W TSD, available in the docket for
this
[[Page 50304]]
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ Identification and Evaluation of Opportunities to Reduce
Methane Losses at Four Gas Processing Plants. Prepared for Gas
Technology Institute under U.S. EPA Grant No. 827754-01-0.
Clearstone Engineering. June 20, 2002. Available in the docket for
this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA is proposing to define ``nitrogen removal unit'' in 40 CFR
98.238 as a process unit that separates nitrogen from natural gas using
various separation processes (e.g., cryogenic units, membrane units)
and ``nitrogen removal unit vent emissions'' as the nitrogen gas
separated from the natural gas and released with CH4 and
other gases to the atmosphere, flare, or other combustion unit. The EPA
is proposing to amend 40 CFR 98.232(c)(17), 98.232(d)(5),
98.232(g)(10), 98.232(h)(9), and 98.232(j)(3) to add nitrogen removal
unit vents to the list of source types for which the industry segments
previously specified would be required to report emissions.
Corresponding additions are proposed at 40 CFR 98.236(a) to add
nitrogen removal units to the list of equipment and activities that
would be reported for each of these industry segments.
The EPA is proposing CH4 emission calculation
methodologies for nitrogen removal units that are identical to the
existing calculation methodologies in 40 CFR 98.233(d) for AGRs (which
currently apply to calculating emissions of CO2). These
methods include use of vent meters, engineering calculations based upon
flowrate of gas streams, or calculation using simulation software.
Further, the EPA is proposing to add relevant reporting elements for
CH4 emissions from nitrogen removal units to 40 CFR
98.236(d) for each of the proposed allowable calculation methodologies.
As a part of this proposed rulemaking, the EPA is also proposing to
require the reporting of CH4 emissions from AGR vents. Refer
to section III.F.1 of this preamble for more detailed discussion of the
calculation methodologies, including additional revisions proposed as
part of this rulemaking and which we propose would also apply to
nitrogen removal units.
The EPA is proposing that nitrogen removal unit vents routed to a
flare would follow the same calculation requirements as other flared
emission source types in proposed 40 CFR 98.233(n) and that flared
nitrogen removal unit emissions (CO2, CH4, and
N2O) would be reported under proposed 40 CFR 98.236(n)
separately from vented nitrogen removal unit emissions
(CH4). The flared nitrogen removal unit emissions would be
included with ``other'' flared source types for purposes of the
proposed disaggregation provisions in proposed 40 CFR 98.233(n)(10) and
proposed 40 CFR 98.236(n)(19). See section III.N of this preamble for
more information on the proposed flaring calculation and reporting
provisions.
The EPA is seeking comment on the proposal to require reporting of
CH4 emissions from nitrogen removal unit venting, including
the estimated magnitude of emissions, which industry segments, if any,
should be required to report nitrogen removal unit vent emissions, and
whether the existing calculation methods for AGR vents are appropriate
and if there are other methods the EPA should consider.
3. Produced Water Tanks
The EPA is proposing to add CH4 emissions from produced
water tanks to subpart W. The EPA is proposing to define ``produced
water'' consistent with the definition in the effluent guidelines for
the oil and gas extraction point source category (40 CFR 435.11(bb)),
which is the water (brine) brought up from the hydrocarbon-bearing
strata during the extraction of oil and gas, and can include formation
water, injection water, and any chemicals added downhole or during the
oil/water separation process. Produced water is the largest wastewater
source by volume generated during oil and gas extraction.\42\ The ratio
of produced water to recovered hydrocarbon is extremely variable across
the U.S., ranging from less than 1:1 to more than 100:1.\43\ In the
2022 U.S. GHG Inventory emissions estimate for 2020, the EPA estimated
approximately 140,300 mt CH4 emissions from produced water
tanks associated with natural gas wells and 88,600 mt CH4
emissions from produced water tanks associated with oil wells.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ Summary of Input on Oil and Gas Extraction Wastewater
Management Practices Under the Clean Water Act. Final Report. EPA-
821-S19-001. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Engineering and
Analysis Division, Office of Water. Washington, DC May 2020.
\43\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA is proposing amendments to 40 CFR 98.233(j) to require
reporters with atmospheric pressure storage tanks receiving produced
water to calculate CH4 emissions using any of the three
calculation methodologies specified in 40 CFR 98.233(j)(1) through
(3).\44\ For facilities with produced water storage tanks electing to
model their CH4 emissions consistent with 40 CFR
98.233(j)(1), the EPA is proposing to allow facilities to select any
software option that meets the requirements currently stated in 40 CFR
98.233(j)(1) (i.e., to select a modeling software that uses the Peng-
Robinson equation of state, models flashing emissions from produced
water, and speciates CH4 emissions that result when the
produced water from the separator or non-separator equipment enters an
atmospheric pressure storage tank), but we request comment on whether
the Peng-Robinson equation of state should be used for produced water
tanks and whether there are other parameters that should be considered
requirements for modeling emissions from produced water tanks. We
expect that modeling flashing emissions from produced water tanks would
calculate accurate estimates of CH4 emissions, as it is
widely accepted that these models provide accurate estimates of
flashing emissions from hydrocarbon liquids atmospheric storage tanks.
Therefore, we expect process simulation software options such as Bryan
Research & Engineering (BRE)'s ProMax[supreg] \45\ (ProMax) would be
appropriate for modeling produced water CH4 emissions. For
example, BRE has produced a white paper regarding ProMax's accuracy in
predicting produced water emissions.\46\ However, per the 2021 API
Compendium, the EPA is aware that API 4697 E&P Tanks v3.0 program \47\
is not appropriate for determining emissions from produced water tanks,
as the program's methodology is based on properties specific to crude
oil. Given that API's E&P Tanks software cannot model produced water
tanks, we are proposing to specifically state in 40 CFR 98.233(j)(1)
that API's E&P Tanks should only be used for modeling atmospheric
storage tanks receiving hydrocarbon liquids.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ As part of the proposed amendment to require reporters to
calculate and report emissions from produced water tanks, we are
also proposing conforming edits throughout subpart W to refer to
hydrocarbon liquids and produced water instead of just hydrocarbon
liquids.
\45\ BRE Promax[supreg] software available from BRE website
(https://www.bre.com/).
\46\ Are Produced Water Emission Factors Accurate? Bryan
Research & Engineering, Inc. Available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
\47\ E&P Tanks v3.0 software and the user guide (Publication
4697) formerly available from the API website.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are several documents that address produced water emissions;
however, the emission factors used in all of these documents all
ultimately trace back to the 1996 GRI/EPA study.\48\
[[Page 50305]]
Therefore, the EPA is proposing to add CH4 emission factors
to 40 CFR 98.233(j)(3) that were developed as part of the 1996 GRI/EPA
study,\49\ which is consistent with the factors used by the U.S. GHG
Inventory.\50\ The emission estimates from the 1996 GRI/EPA study were
estimated using an ASPEN PLUS process simulation assuming the natural
gas industry produces 497 million barrels of salt water annually,
including approximately 100 million barrels from coal bed
CH4 wells; 70 percent of the water from gas wells is
reinjected with the remaining 30 percent stored in atmospheric tanks;
and hydrocarbon composition is 100 percent CH4.\51\ The 1996
GRI/EPA study estimated produced water emissions for salt contents of
2, 10, and 20 percent, and pressures of 50, 250, and 1,000 pounds per
square inch. The 2021 API Compendium (Table 6-26) provides the 1996
GRI/EPA emission factors converted from units of million pounds per
year to units of metric tons per thousand barrels (based upon the
assumption of 497 million barrels of produced water annual production).
In addition, average emission factors were calculated for each
pressure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ Studies referencing the 1996 GRI/EPA study produced water
emission factors include: (1) 2021 API Compendium; (2) Oil & Gas
Production Protocol, Annex II to the General Reporting Protocol,
Version 1.0. The Climate Registry. February 2010; (3) 2011 Oil and
Gas Emission Inventory Enhancement Project for CenSARA States.
Produced by ENVIRON International Corporation and Eastern Research
Group, Inc. (ERG) for Central States Air Resources Agencies
(CenSARA). December 2012; and (4) Instructions for Using the 2017
EPA Nonpoint Oil and Gas Emissions Estimation Tool, Production
Module. Produced by Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG) for U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. October 2019.
\49\ Methane Emissions from the Natural Gas Industry, Volume 6:
Vented and Combustion Source Summary, Final Report. GRI-94/0257.23
and EPA-600/R-96-080f. Gas Research Institute and U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. June 1996. Available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
\50\ U.S. EPA. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and
Sinks 1990-2019: Updates for Produced Water Emissions. April 2021.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2023-0234.
\51\ Atlas of Gas Related Produced Water for 1990. 95/0016.
Produced by Energy Environmental Research Center, University of
North Dakota, and ENSR Consulting and Engineering for Gas Research
Institute. May 1995. Available in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We also propose to add reporting requirements for produced water
tanks. The provisions in 40 CFR 98.236(j)(1) are proposed to be revised
to refer to both hydrocarbon liquid and produced water atmospheric
storage tanks. Additionally, we are proposing to add reporting
requirements to 40 CFR 98.236(j)(2) for total annual produced water
volumes for each pressure range, estimates of the fraction of produced
water throughput that is controlled by flares and/or vapor recovery,
counts of controlled and uncontrolled produced water tanks, and annual
CH4 emissions vented directly to atmosphere from produced
water tanks. Flared produced water tank emissions would be reported
under 40 CFR 98.236(n), as proposed in section III.N.2 of this
preamble. Industry segments required to report emissions from produced
water tanks would include Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production,
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting, and Onshore
Natural Gas Processing. The EPA is also proposing to revise the
emission source type name in 40 CFR 98.233(j) and 40 CFR 98.236(j) from
``onshore production and onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering
and boosting storage tanks'' to ``hydrocarbon liquids and produced
water storage tanks'' to reflect the proposed addition of produced
water tanks. The EPA is also proposing to revise the source type
provided in 40 CFR 98.232(c)(10) and 40 CFR 98.232(j)(6) to
``Hydrocarbon liquid and produced water storage tank emissions'' which
reflects the addition of produced water tanks.
4. Mud Degassing
The EPA is proposing to add a new emission source type to subpart W
for emissions from drilling mud degassing. The proposed amendments for
this new source type would add calculation and reporting requirements
for CH4 emissions from mud degassing associated with well
drilling for onshore petroleum and natural gas production facilities in
40 CFR 98.232(c), 98.233(dd), and 98.236(dd). In this proposal, the EPA
is not proposing to require the reporting of CO2 emissions
from this source. Based on available research, it appears that
CH4 is the primary GHG emitted from this source, while
emissions of CO2 are expected to be very small. However, as
noted later in this section, the EPA is seeking comment on requiring
reporting of CO2 emissions from mud degassing, including
comment on the expected magnitude of CO2 emissions from mud
degassing and appropriate calculation methods for CO2
emissions from mud degassing.
The term ``drilling mud,'' also referred to as ``drilling fluid,''
refers to a class of viscous fluids used during the drilling of oil and
gas wells. Throughout the drilling process, drilling mud is pumped
continuously through the drill string and out the bit to cool and
lubricate the drill bit, carry cuttings away from the drill bit, and to
maintain the desired pressure within the well. The three types of
drilling mud used in the oil and gas industry are water-based, oil-
based, and synthetic-based muds. The density of the mud can be
controlled to counteract formation pressure, and drilling mud adds
stability to the bore hole. During drilling, gas is freed from rock
drilled out of the wellbore and becomes entrained in the drilling mud
that is being pumped continuously through the drill string.
As drilling mud circulates through the wellbore, natural gas and
heavier hydrocarbons can become entrained in the mud. Mud degassing
refers to the practice of extracting the entrained gas from drilling
mud once it is outside the wellbore. Gas entrained in the drilling mud
is separated from the mud in a mud separator and then vented directly
to the atmosphere or flared. The entrained gas contains CH4
and can contain other pollutants such as volatile organic compounds
(VOC) and possibly CO2, depending on the gas characteristics
of the hydrocarbon-bearing zones through which the borehole is drilled,
including the target zone. Although the majority of natural gas will be
released when the mud passes through the mud separator, small
quantities of natural gas will remain entrained in the drilling mud and
in the rock cuttings after the mud passes through the traps. These
small quantities will eventually be released to the atmosphere as the
drilling mud and associated cuttings are stored, processed and
disposed.
Based on our review of the available information regarding mud
degassing emissions, we note that mud degassing has been included only
in a limited number of U.S. state-level, regional and national
inventories of the onshore oil and gas production segments, mostly due
to a lack of sufficient data to characterize the emissions. In a 1977
EPA publication titled, Atmospheric Emissions from Offshore Oil and Gas
Development and Production,\52\ the EPA estimated two total hydrocarbon
(THC) emission factors in units of emissions per drilling day, one for
water-based mud degassing and the other for oil-based mud degassing,
based on engineering calculations. The 1977 EPA publication does not
include emission factors for synthetic-based mud. Several entities,
such as the state of New York and the Central States Air Resources
Agency (CenSARA), have incorporated estimates for mud degassing in
their inventory estimates. A CenSARA study conducted in 2011 developed
default emission factors derived from the 1977 EPA report.\53\ The
CenSARA study
[[Page 50306]]
added a THC emission factor for synthetic drilling muds and also
provided emission factors in mt CH4 per drilling day. The
THC emission factors are 881.84 pounds per drilling day for water-based
muds and 198.41 pounds per drilling day for oil-based and synthetic
drilling muds. The CH4-specific emission factors are 0.2605
mt CH4 per drilling day for water-based muds and 0.0586 mt
per drilling day for oil-based and synthetic drilling muds; they are
based on an assumption of 83.85 percent CH4 in the gas
stream vented from mud degassing. The CenSARA methodology does allow
for adjustment of the CH4 default emission factors to local
conditions by multiplying the nationwide emission factor to the ratio
of the local CH4 mole percent of vented gas to the mole
percent of CH4 from the vented gas used to derive the
CenSARA emission factor (83.85).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ Atmospheric Emissions from Offshore Oil and Gas Development
and Production. Produced by Energy Resources Co. for Environmental
Protection Agency. Available in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
\53\ 2011 Oil and Gas Emission Inventory Enhancement Project for
CenSARA States. Produced by ENVIRON International Corporation for
Central States Air Resources Agencies. November 2011. Available at
https://www.deq.ok.gov/wp-content/uploads/air-division/EI_OG_Final_Report_CenSara_122712.pdf and in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For its emissions inventory, the state of New York based its
emission factor for mud degassing on the CenSARA study, while also
concluding that communication with experts indicated that there were
not any more recent estimates available.\54\ Furthermore, New York only
adopted the CenSARA CH4 emission factor of 0.2605 mt
CH4 per drilling day for water-based muds. This factor
serves as the single emission factor for New York. Unlike CenSARA, New
York's calculation methods do not provide the ability for users to make
a local adjustment to the emission factor. Both CenSARA and New York
define the number of drilling days as the completion date minus the
spud date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ New York State Oil and Gas Sector: Methane Emissions
Inventory. Produced by Abt Associates for New York State Energy
Research and Development Authority. November 2022. Available at
https://www.nyserda.ny.gov/-/media/Project/Nyserda/Files/Publications/Energy-Analysis/22-38-New-York-State-Oil-and-Gas-Sector-Methane-Report-acc.pdf and in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. GHG Inventory does not currently include mud degassing
emissions. In 2020, the EPA released a memorandum discussing the
potential inclusion of CH4 emissions estimates for mud
degassing as an update under consideration for the U.S. GHG Inventory,
based on the THC emission factors presented in the 1977 EPA
publication.\55\ Specifically, the memorandum provided emission factors
of 0.32 mt CH4 per drilling day for water-based drilling
muds and 0.07 mt CH4 per drilling day for oil-based drilling
muds in the discussion. The CH4 emission factor presented for
consideration for updating the U.S. GHG Inventory assumed a default
CH4 fraction (by weight) of 61.2 percent for associated gas.
The EPA has not to date incorporated the use of these emission factors,
and mud degassing is not included in the current U.S. GHG Inventory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\55\ U.S. EPA. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and
Sinks 1990-2019: Update under Consideration for Mud Degassing
Emissions. September 2020. Available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2020-09/documents/ghgi-webinar2020-degassing.pdf and
in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-
0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Separately, API published updated CH4 and whole gas
emission factors based on the emission factors from the 1977 EPA
publication in their 2021 API Compendium.\56\ API's updated
CH4 emission factors are based on a gas content of 65.13
weight percent CH4, derived from sample data provided in the
1977 EPA publication. While including the same THC and CH4
emission factors as CenSARA, API specifies that these are for offshore
drilling only. The API Compendium presents lower emission factors for
onshore drilling. In the 2021 API Compendium, API stated that it
adjusted the 1977 EPA values for borehole size and porosity to better
reflect those used in onshore drilling. API's onshore production
CH4 emission factors are 0.0458 mt per drilling day for
water-based mud and 0.0103 mt per drilling day for oil-based and
synthetic muds. Similar to CenSARA, the API methodology allows for the
nationwide emission factors to be adjusted to local conditions by
applying a ratio of the mole percent in vented gas from degassing at
local operations to the nationwide mole percent of 83.85.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ Compendium of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Methodologies For
The Natural Gas And Oil Industry. Produced by URS Corporation for
American Petroleum Institute. November 2021. Available at https://www.api.org/-/media/files/policy/esg/ghg/2021-api-ghg-compendium-110921.pdf and in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although most efforts have focused on the development of emission
factors for mud degassing, the 2021 API Compendium also encourages
operators to use site-specific CH4 (and CO2 if
present) measurements to estimate emissions if possible. Generally,
measured data would involve use of mud-logger services with hydrocarbon
gas sensors. In some cases, operators may use gas chromatography, but
gas chromatography alone does not allow calculation of gas
concentration in the mud. Gas emissions would be determined by using
the volumetric flowrate of the mud, the amount of time of mud flow and
the concentration of CH4 and CO2 in the mud.
After careful consideration of the available literature and well
drilling and mud degassing practices, the EPA is proposing two options
in a new paragraph (40 CFR 98.233(dd)) to measure CH4
emissions from drilling mud degassing: use of measurements taken
through mudlogging and gas detection at representative wells and use of
emission factors and activity counts.
Calculation Method 1 would require the reporter to calculate
CH4 emissions from mud degassing for a representative well.
To qualify as a representative well, the well would be required to be
drilled in the same sub-basin and at the same targeted total depth from
the surface as the wells it is representative of. Calculation Method 1
would be required to be used when the reporter has taken mudlogging
measurements, including gas trap-derived gas concentration and mud
pumping rate, for at least one well in the sub-basin at the approximate
total depth. A CH4 emissions rate from mud degassing would
be calculated for the representative well and the CH4
emission rate for the well would be applied to the total time drilling
mud is circulated through the wellbore during drilling for each of the
other wells drilled in the same sub-basin and targeting the same
approximate total depth from surface in the reporting year.
The operator would be required to identify and calculate natural
gas emissions for a new representative well at least once every 2 years
for each sub-basin and targeted depth within the facility to ensure
that the emissions from representative wells are representative of the
operating and drilling practices within each applicable sub-basin in
the facility. In the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production
industry segment, facilities are defined at the basin-level. In the
first year of reporting, however, the operator may use measurements
from the prior reporting year if measurements from the current
reporting year are not available.
Proposed Calculation Method 1 uses a three-step approach to
calculate emissions from mud degassing for each well in a particular
sub-basin and at the same approximate total targeted depth. In the
first step, reporters would calculate CH4 emissions for the
representative well using proposed equation W-41. For this step, the
reporter would need to know the average efflux mud rate from the mud
pump in gallons per minute (gpm),
[[Page 50307]]
``MRr''; the total amount of time in minutes that drilling
mud is circulated in the representative well, ``Tr''; the
percentage of the fluid flow that is gas, ``Xn''; and the
measured mole concentration of CH4, ``GHGCH4.''
If a representative well cannot be identified because mudlogging was
not used for any well within the same sub-basin and at the same
targeted approximate total depth, the reporter may choose a
representative well within the facility that is drilled into the same
formation and at the same approximate total depth.
In the second step, reporters would calculate the CH4
emissions rate for the representative well using proposed equation W-
42. The emissions rate would be derived by dividing the representative
well's total annual CH4 emissions, ``Es,CH4,r,''
by the total time that drilling mud is circulated in the representative
well, ``Tr.'' In the third step, reporters would apply the
CH4 emissions rate calculated in the second step to other
wells in the sub-basin that are at the same approximate total depth to
derive the total volume of CH4 emissions for each well at
that depth. In this step, the reporter would calculate total
CH4 emissions for each well, ``p,'' in the same sub-basin
and at the same approximate total depth as the representative well
using proposed equation W-43, where the total time drilling mud is
circulated in the well would be multiplied by the representative well's
emissions rate, ``ERs,CH4,p,'' determined using equation W-
42 in step 2.
If mudlogging measurements were not taken, the EPA is proposing
that reporters would use Calculation Method 2 and determine emissions
from mud degassing using proposed equation W-44, which incorporates the
nationwide emission factors provided by the CenSARA study.
Specifically, the EPA is proposing an emission factor of 0.2605 mt
CH4 per drilling day per well for water-based mud and a
factor of 0.0586 mt CH4 per drilling day per well for oil-
based and synthetic drilling muds. As noted by New York state, there
are limited data and few studies on mud degassing emissions. The EPA is
proposing these emission factors as an alternative calculation method
because our assessment of the available literature is that these
proposed emission factors are generally appropriate if measurements are
not available. In addition, the emission factors proposed are
consistent with those of several organizations that calculate and
publish emissions from mud degassing in their inventories. As noted
previously in this section, these factors are based on a CH4
mole percent of 83.85 in the gas stream vented from mud degassing. The
EPA is not proposing to allow adjustment of the emission factors for
local conditions under proposed Calculation Method 2 because the use of
emission factors under this proposed calculation method would only be
allowed if the operator did not have site-specific measurements (i.e.,
would not have the measurement that would be the basis of such an
adjustment).
Although the EPA is proposing to use the nationwide emission
factors provided by the CenSARA study, the EPA is proposing to define
the number of drilling days differently than the study. Rather than
considering the first drilling day to be the day the well is spudded,
we are proposing that the total number of drilling days is the sum of
all days from the first day that the borehole penetrates the first
hydrocarbon-bearing zone through the completion of all drilling
activity. The EPA believes that penetration of the first hydrocarbon-
bearing zone more accurately reflects the point in time where
CH4 will start becoming entrained in drilling mud. The EPA
is also defining the last drilling day as the day drilling mud ceases
to be circulated in the well. Reporters would calculate emissions for
each well by multiplying the emission factor by the number of drilling
days per well per year.
The EPA is seeking comment on these calculation methodologies,
including whether there are calculation methodologies other than the
proposed methods that the EPA should consider for calculating
CH4 emissions from mud degassing. The EPA is also seeking
comment on CO2 emissions from mud degassing, including the
magnitude of CO2 emissions from this source type, whether
emissions of CO2 should be reported, and suggested
calculation methods for CO2 emissions. The EPA is also
seeking comment on whether to consider mud weight balance in the
derivation of emission factors, and if so, how to incorporate such
considerations. Underbalanced, balanced, and overbalanced all lead to
varying hydrostatic weights of the mud and could affect the flow of
hydrocarbons into the well bore, possibly impacting emissions
calculations. However, we are not aware of any studies to date that
have considered mud weight balance.
In addition to the calculation requirements, the EPA is proposing
corresponding reporting requirements for emissions by well in 40 CFR
98.236(dd). Specifically, for all wells with mud degassing emissions
that use Calculation Method 1, the reporter would report the well ID
number for each well for which mud degassing emissions are calculated,
the approximate total depth of the well in feet below surface, and the
total time in minutes that drilling mud is circulated in the well.
Reporters would also report whether the drilling mud used was water-
based, oil-based, or synthetic. Additionally, for a well that is not a
representative well, reporters would report the well ID number of the
representative well that was used to derive the CH4
emissions rate used to calculate emissions from the non-representative
well.
For reporters using Calculation Method 1, the EPA is also proposing
to require additional data on representative wells, including the
average mud flow rate in gpm, the concentration of natural gas in the
drilling mud, the measured mole fraction of CH4 in the
drilling mud, and the CH4 emissions rate. For reporters
using Calculation Method 2, the EPA is proposing that reporters would
report the well ID number for each well for which mud degassing
emissions are calculated, the total number of drilling days at each
well, and whether the drilling mud used was water-based, oil-based, or
synthetic. Annual CH4 emissions in mt CH4 would
be reported for each well whether emissions were calculated using
Calculation Method 1 or Calculation Method 2.
To clearly define the emission source type and parameters to use in
the emissions calculations, the EPA is proposing to define three new
terms in 40 CFR 98.238. The EPA is proposing to define ``drilling mud''
as a mixture of clays and additives with water, oil, or synthetic
materials continuously pumped through the drill string and out the bit
while drilling to cool and lubricate the drill bit and to move cuttings
through the wellbore to the surface. The EPA is proposing to define
``drilling mud degassing'' as the practice of safely removing pockets
of free gas entrained in the drilling mud once it is outside of the
wellbore. ``Mud rate'' is proposed to mean the pumping rate of the mud
by the mud pumps, usually measured in gpm. The mud rate would be an
input to proposed equation W-41.
Finally, we note that in proposing these new requirements, we
considered adding mud degassing emissions to two existing source
categories in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production industry
segment, well completions and workovers with hydraulic fracturing and
well completions and workover without hydraulic fracturing, rather than
proposing calculation and reporting
[[Page 50308]]
requirements for mud degassing as a new emissions source. Upstream oil
and gas development is undertaken in two stages, exploration and
production. The exploration stage consists of well drilling followed by
well completion, including casing of the well and hydraulically
fracturing the well (in the case of hydraulically fractured
completion). However, for purposes of this proposal, the EPA has
determined that well drilling activities are a distinct activity
separate from well completion. For example, a common practice in the
oil and gas industry is to drill a well but leave the borehole
uncompleted (referred to in the oil and gas industry as ``drilled but
uncompleted''). These boreholes are left uncompleted for a period of
time until economic conditions improve, completion crews are available,
or for other reasons. Even without completion, the drilling activity
still has the potential to produce emissions. Therefore, the EPA is
proposing drilling mud degassing as a new emissions source type source
for onshore petroleum and natural gas production facilities.
5. Crankcase Venting
The EPA is proposing to add calculation and reporting requirements
for CH4 emissions from a new emission source type, crankcase
ventilation from RICE or GT used in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural
Gas Production, Onshore Natural Gas Processing, Onshore Natural Gas
Transmission Compression, Underground Natural Gas Storage, LNG Storage,
LNG Import and Export Equipment, Natural Gas Distribution, and Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry segments.
Crankcase ventilation is the process of venting or removing blow-by
from the void spaces of an internal combustion engine outside of the
combustion cylinders to prevent excessive pressure build-up within the
engine.\57\ This proposed source does not include ingestive systems
that vent blow-by into the engine where it is returned to the
combustion process.\58\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\57\ Cox, J. ``Managing Engine Blow-by with Crankcase
Ventilation Systems.'' The Solberg Blog, June 17, 2022. Available at
https://www.solbergmfg.com/en/resources/blog/crankcase-ventilation-system-for-engine-in-the-pow and in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
\58\ See, e.g., Caterpillar. Application & Installation Guide:
Crankcase Ventilation Systems. LEBW4958-04. 2015. Available in the
docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA first proposed including ``crankcase vents'' in subpart W
in the January 2016 proposal to add leaker emission factors (81 FR
4987, January 29, 2016). At that time in 2016, the EPA proposed to add
new monitoring methods for detecting leaks from oil and gas equipment
in the petroleum and natural gas systems source category consistent
with the leak detection methods in the then proposed NSPS OOOOa (80 FR
56593, September 18, 2015). Specifically, in 2016, the EPA proposed
aligning subpart W equipment components with the 2015 proposed NSPS
OOOOa definition of ``fugitive emissions component,'' which was ``any
component that has the potential to emit fugitive emissions of
[CH4] or VOC at a well site or compressor station site,
including but not limited to valves, connectors, pressure relief
devices, open-ended lines, access doors, flanges, closed vent systems,
thief hatches or other openings on storage vessels, agitator seals,
distance pieces, crankcase vents, blowdown vents, pump seals or
diaphragms, compressors, separators, pressure vessels, dehydrators,
heaters, instruments, and meters'' (80 FR 56593, September 18, 2015).
The proposed NSPS OOOOa definition of ``fugitive emissions component''
also indicated that it did not include devices that ``vent as part of
normal operations.'' Commenters on the proposed NSPS OOOOa indicated
that some of the examples listed within the proposed definition of
``fugitive emissions component'' did include devices that vent as part
of normal operations, including crankcase vents.\59\ As a result of
these comments, the final definition for ``fugitive emissions
component'' in the NSPS OOOOa (81 FR 35824, June 3, 2016) did not
include the reference to ``crankcase vents'' or other types of devices
that vent as part of normal operations, consistent with the EPA's
stated intent in the 2015 NSPS OOOOa proposal not to include those
devices in the definition. The 2016 promulgated amendments to subpart W
for fugitive emissions aligned with the definition of ``fugitive
emissions component'' in the final NSPS OOOOa.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\59\ U.S. EPA. EPA's Responses to Public Comments on the EPA's
Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New,
Reconstructed, and Modified Sources. Chapter 4--Fugitives
Monitoring. May 2016. Available as EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505-7632 and in
the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have estimated sector-wide emissions from crankcase ventilation
using data from a 2015 study published by Johnson et al., Methane
Emissions from Leak and Loss Audits of Natural Gas Compressor Stations
and Storage Facilities.\60\ In this study, the audit of three natural
gas compressor stations and two natural gas storage facilities yielded
an average ratio of crankcase-to-exhaust emissions of 14.4 percent. The
study authors compared total emissions rate (crankcase plus exhaust)
against literature values of a four-cylinder lean burning engine in
EPA's Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors (AP-42).\61\ The
literature value overpredicted the combined emissions by 11.4 percent,
which slightly exceeded the calculated uncertainty for exhaust
emissions of 7.2 percent. This comparison indicates the measured value
offers a reasonable estimate of CH4 loss from natural gas
compressor stations and storage facilities. Based on this study, the
EPA conservatively estimates that the total CH4 emissions
from crankcase ventilation that could be reported to the GHGRP would be
approximately 800,000 mt per year, assuming crankcase emissions are
14.4 percent of combustion emissions from all proposed industry
segments. For more information on the estimation of potential
CH4 emissions from crankcase venting, see the subpart W TSD,
available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ Johnson, D.R., et al. 2015. ``Methane Emissions from Leak
and Loss Audits of Natural Gas Compressor Stations and Storage
Facilities.'' Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 13, 8132-8138. July
4, 2015. Available at https://doi.org/10.1021/es506163m and in the
docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
\61\ U.S. EPA. AP-42 Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission
Factors, 5th ed. Volume I, Chapter 3: Stationary Internal Combustion
Sources: Section 3.1 Stationary Gas Turbines and Section 3.2 Natural
Gas-fired Reciprocating Engines. Available at https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-factors-and-quantification/ap-42-fifth-edition-volume-i-chapter-3-stationary-0 and in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The API provided an emission factor for CH4 from
crankcase ventilation in their 2021 API Compendium.\62\ API's emission
factor was developed from results from Phase II of a comprehensive
measurement program conducted to determine cost-effective directed
inspection and maintenance control opportunities for reducing natural
gas losses due to fugitive equipment leaks and avoidable process
inefficiencies. Phase II of the program was conducted at five gas
processing plants, seven gathering compressor stations, and twelve well
sites during 2004 and 2005.\63\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\62\ Compendium of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Methodologies For
The Natural Gas And Oil Industry. Produced by URS Corporation for
American Petroleum Institute. November 2021. Available at https://www.api.org/-/media/files/policy/esg/ghg/2021-api-ghg-compendium-110921.pdf and in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
\63\ Cost-Effective Directed Inspection and Maintenance Control
Opportunities at Five Gas Processing Plants and Upstream Gathering
Compressor Stations and Well Sites. EPA Phase II Aggregate Site
Report prepared for U.S. EPA Natural Gas STAR Program by Natural Gas
Machinery Laboratory, Clearstone Engineering Ltd., and Innovative
Environmental Solutions, Inc. March 2006. Available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016-08/documents/clearstone_ii_03_2006.pdf and in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 50309]]
Based on the information provided in this section, the EPA is
proposing to add 40 CFR 98.233(ee) to provide a component-level average
emission factor approach for estimating emissions for crankcase
ventilation based on the number of crankcase vents on RICE or GT in the
facility. The proposed CH4 emission factor for crankcase
ventilation is 2.28 standard cubic feet per hour per source, as
provided in the 2021 API Compendium. The 2021 API Compendium emission
factor was selected as representative because it was developed from
results of the most comprehensive field study of crankcase ventilation
in the oil and natural sector available to date. Site-specific
information required for the emission calculation would include the
number of crankcase vents on RICE or GT, the operating time of each
engine or GT, and the concentration of CH4 in the gas stream
entering the engines or GT. If site-specific CH4
concentration is unknown, the proposed provision includes an option to
determine the CH4 concentration in the gas stream using
either engineering estimates based on best available data or the
provisions of 40 CFR 98.233(u)(2). The EPA is seeking comment on
whether this calculation method is appropriate and whether there are
other methodologies that we should consider providing, including
details on how those additional methods would be applied to this
source. For reporting, the EPA is proposing to add 40 CFR 98.236(ee) to
require reporters to provide emissions, the number of crankcase vents
at the facility, and engine or GT operating hours.
D. Reporting for the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production and
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting Industry
Segments
Within the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production and Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry segments, GHG
emissions and activity data are currently generally reported at the
basin, county/sub-basin, or unit level, depending upon the specific
emission source. Examples of emission sources that report at the sub-
basin or county level include liquids unloading, completions and
workovers with hydraulic fracturing, and storage tanks. Sources that
report at the facility (basin) level include natural gas pneumatic
devices, blowdown vent stacks, and equipment leaks. The current
aggregation of data reported within the Onshore Petroleum and Natural
Gas Production and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and
Boosting segments can present challenges in the process of emissions
verification, with corresponding potential impacts on data quality, and
it also limits data transparency.
In order to address these concerns and improve data quality
consistent with section II.C of this preamble, the EPA is proposing to
disaggregate reporting requirements within the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting industry segments. As a first step, the EPA is proposing
to revise the reporting requirements to be more explicitly consistent
with the current reporting form structure for the well identification
(ID) numbers at the facility, with two proposed changes and one
addition. Currently, for certain emission sources directly related to
wells (liquids unloading, completions and workovers with hydraulic
fracturing, completions and workovers without hydraulic fracturing well
testing, and associated natural gas), subpart W requires reporters to
provide a list of well ID numbers in each sub-basin that contributed to
the emissions (e.g., a list of well IDs that had completions or
workovers with hydraulic fracturing). Under existing 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(1)(ii)(D) through (H), reporters are also asked to provide
the counts of wells that were producing, acquired, divested, completed,
and/or permanently taken out of production for each sub-basin, along
with a list of well ID number for the wells in each of those
categories. For the subpart W reporting form, these requirements were
implemented through addition of a single table, in which reporters
provide a list of all well ID numbers, the sub-basin, the operating
status per 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(1)(ii)(D) through (H), and any well-
specific information required for the emission source types directly
related to wells. The EPA is proposing to revise 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(1)(ii) and add requirements to 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(1)(iii)
that reflect this reporting form structure, with two notable changes.
First, the EPA is proposing to no longer require reporting of the sub-
basin ID for each well. Instead, reporters would report the sub-basin
ID by well-pad and then report the well-pad ID on which the well is
located. The well-pad ID is a new proposed data element and is
described in the following paragraph. Second, the EPA is proposing to
revise the requirements to provide a list of well IDs for the five
emission source types directly related to wells (currently required in
40 CFR 98.236(f)(1)(ii), (f)(2)(i), (g)(1), (h)(1)(i), (h)(2)(i),
(h)(3)(i), (h)(4)(i), (l)(1)(ii), (l)(2)(ii), (l)(3)(ii), (l)(4)(ii),
(m)(1), (m)(7)(i), and (m)(8)(i)) to instead specify that reporters
should report emissions and activity data for each of those emission
source types by well within the source-specific reporting requirements,
as described later in this section.
Second, the EPA is proposing to add the following data elements:
well-pad ID (for Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production segment)
and gathering and boosting site ID (for Onshore Petroleum and Natural
Gas Gathering and Boosting). These proposed data elements are hereafter
collectively referred to as ``site-level IDs.'' The EPA is proposing to
add to 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(1)(iv) (for Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production) and 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(10)(v) (for Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting) requirements for reporting of
information related to each well-pad ID and gathering and boosting site
ID, respectively. The proposed reporting elements for each well-pad ID
include a unique name or ID for each well-pad, the sub-basin ID, and
the location (i.e., representative latitude and longitude coordinates).
For the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segments, the EPA is proposing at 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(10)(v) to
require reporters to provide a unique name or ID, the site type, and
the location for each gathering and boosting site. For the ``site
type'' for each gathering and boosting site, the EPA is proposing that
reporters would select between ``gathering compressor station,''
``centralized oil production site,'' ``gathering pipeline site,'' or
``other fence-line site.'' The EPA is proposing a definition of
``gathering compressor station'' in 40 CFR 98.238 to be used for the
purposes of this reporting requirement and to differentiate gathering
compressor stations from other types of compressor stations in subpart
W (e.g., transmission compressor stations). The Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry segment also includes
centralized oil production sites that collect oil from multiple well-
pads but that do not have compressors (i.e.,
[[Page 50310]]
are not ``compressor stations''). The EPA is also proposing to add a
definition of a ``centralized oil production site'' in 40 CFR 98.238 to
be used for the purposes of this reporting requirement. For gathering
pipelines, the EPA is proposing a definition of ``gathering pipeline
site'' to specify that it is all the gathering pipelines at the
facility within a single state. In addition, the EPA has received
information from stakeholders noting that there are facility
configurations that would not clearly fit within the proposed
definition for ``gathering compressor station'' or ``centralized oil
production site,'' including, but not limited to, booster stations,
dehydration facilities, and treating facilities.\64\ The EPA is
proposing to provide the ``other fence-line site'' site type to cover
these types of sites. For gathering pipelines, the EPA is proposing
within the definition of ``gathering and boosting site'' that a
gathering pipeline site is all the gathering pipelines at the facility
within a single state. For the ``location'' reported for each gathering
and boosting site, the EPA is proposing that reporters would provide
the representative latitude and longitude coordinates where the site
type is a gathering compressor station, centralized oil production site
or other fence-line facility, and the state where the site type is a
gathering pipeline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\64\ Letter from Angie Burckhalter, The Petroleum Alliance of
Oklahoma, to Administrator Michael S. Regan, U.S. EPA, Re: Docket
Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0424; Revisions and Confidentiality
Determinations for Data Elements Under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Rule. October 6, 2022. Available in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the emission source types in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural
Gas Production industry segment directly related to wells that
currently report by sub-basin (i.e., well venting for liquids
unloading, completions and workovers with hydraulic fracturing,
completions and workovers without hydraulic fracturing, and associated
gas venting or flaring) or by calculation method and use of a flare
(i.e., well testing), we are proposing to require reporting of
emissions and activity data for each individual well instead of in the
current aggregations (e.g., by sub-basin). Where the current emission
source-level provisions of 40 CFR 98.236 for the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production industry segment and the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry segment require reporting
at either the facility or the sub-basin level (other than the emission
source types directly related to wells), we are proposing to no longer
require reporting at the sub-basin level and instead require reporters
to provide emissions and activity data by well-pad ID or gathering and
boosting site ID for each facility. For emission source types that
report at the unit level (e.g., AGRs, dehydrators, and flares), we are
proposing to maintain reporting at that level but are proposing to also
require the reporter to identify the well-pad ID or gathering and
boosting site ID. This proposed requirement would take the place of the
reporting of the county or sub-basin ID, if applicable. The EPA is
seeking comment as to whether the lower levels of aggregation of
activity data to the site level within the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting segments would cause data elements that are currently not
entitled to confidential treatment (i.e., data elements that are not
considered ``emissions data'' as described in section V of this
preamble) to become entitled to confidential treatment. See section V
of this preamble for further information about the proposed
confidentiality determinations and reporting determinations for inputs
to emissions equations.
In addition, the EPA is proposing revisions to the language of
existing reporting requirements and proposing to require specific
throughput data elements related to wells permanently shut-in and
plugged during the reporting year. First, the EPA is proposing to
revise the phrase ``permanently taken out of production (i.e., plugged
and abandoned)'' in proposed 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(1)(ii)(D) and (H) to
read ``permanently shut-in and plugged'' for consistency with the
language used in CAA section 136. This proposed amendment is for
consistency in language rather than any expected difference in the
wells to be reported or the interpretation of the terms. Second, the
EPA is proposing to require reporting of the quantities of natural gas,
crude oil and condensate produced that is sent to sale during the
reporting year for each well that is permanently shut-in and plugged in
40 CFR 98.236(aa)(1)(iii)(C) through (E) for the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production industry segment and 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(2)(iv)
through (vi) for the Offshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production
industry segment. Third, for each Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production well-pad with a well that was permanently shut-in and
plugged the EPA is proposing to require reporting of the total
quantities of natural gas, crude oil and condensate produced that is
sent to sale in the reporting year for the wells on that well-pad.
These proposed data elements, if finalized, are anticipated to be
useful in the future evaluation of the plugged well provisions of CAA
section 136(f)(7).
E. Natural Gas Pneumatic Device Venting and Natural Gas Driven
Pneumatic Pump Venting
Subpart W currently requires calculation of GHG emissions from
natural gas pneumatic device venting (existing 40 CFR 98.233(a)) and
natural gas driven pneumatic pump venting (existing 40 CFR 98.233(c))
using default population emission factors multiplied by the number of
devices and the average time those devices are ``in-service'' (i.e.,
supplied with natural gas). In our 2022 Proposed Rule, we proposed to
update the population emission factors for pneumatic devices based on
recent study data. Consistent with section II.B of this preamble, we
are proposing calculation methods based on measurements and leak
screening for each source type as described in this section. Under the
proposed calculation methods for pneumatic devices, the existing
default population emission factors for intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices would no longer be applicable and the default
population emission factors for continuous bleed natural gas pneumatic
devices would only be applicable for the leak screening method
(proposed Calculation Method 3).
1. Direct Measurement Methods for Natural Gas Pneumatic Devices and
Natural Gas Pneumatic Pumps
Consistent with section II.B of this preamble, we are proposing to
provide a calculation method based on direct measurement of natural gas
supplied to pneumatic devices in proposed 40 CFR 98.233(a)(1) and
supplied to pneumatic pumps in proposed 40 CFR 98.233(c)(1). We are
proposing that, if a flow monitoring device is installed on the natural
gas supply line dedicated to one or a combination of pneumatic devices,
or the natural gas supply line dedicated to one or more pneumatic
pumps, that are vented directly to the atmosphere, then the measured
flow must be used to calculate the emissions from the pneumatic devices
or pneumatic pumps, as applicable, downstream of that flow monitor. We
are also proposing to require this calculation method when the flow is
continuously measured in a supply line that serves both pneumatic
devices and natural gas driven pneumatic pumps that are all vented
directly to the atmosphere. The
[[Page 50311]]
flow monitor would be required to meet the requirements specified in
existing 40 CFR 98.234(b). We are proposing to denote this natural gas
supply measurement as Calculation Method 1 for pneumatic devices and
pneumatic pumps. We are also proposing to add reporting requirements
for each measurement location to report the type of flow monitor, the
number of each type of pneumatic device being monitored at that
location, and an indication of whether any natural gas driven pneumatic
pumps are also monitored at that location, and the CH4 and
CO2 emissions calculated for that monitoring location in
proposed 40 CFR 98.236(b)(3). Comparable reporting requirements for
natural gas driven pneumatic pumps are specified in proposed 40 CFR
98.236(c)(3).
For natural gas pneumatic devices that do not have or do not elect
to install a flow meter dedicated to measuring the flow of natural gas
supplied to one or a combination of pneumatic devices that are vented
directly to the atmosphere, we are proposing in 40 CFR 98.233(a)(2) to
allow reporters to measure the natural gas emissions from each
pneumatic device vented directly to the atmosphere at the well-pad,
gathering and boosting site, or facility, as applicable, using one of
the measurement methods in existing 40 CFR 98.234(b) through (d). We
are proposing to refer to the vent measurement method as Calculation
Method 2 for pneumatic devices. For natural gas driven pneumatic pumps
that do not have or do not elect to install a flow meter dedicated to
measuring the flow of natural gas supplied to one or a combination of
pneumatic pumps vented directly to the atmosphere, we are proposing to
require that the reporter either measure the natural gas emissions from
each such pneumatic pump at the facility as specified in proposed 40
CFR 98.233(c)(2) or calculate emissions from each such pneumatic pump
at the facility using the default emissions factor as specified in
proposed 40 CFR 98.233(c)(3). The proposed measurement option is
referred to as Calculation Method 2 for pumps and is similar to the
proposed Calculation Method 2 for pneumatic devices. The proposed
pneumatic pump method based on a default emission factor is the same as
the methodology in 40 CFR 98.233(c) of the existing rule and is
referred to as Calculation Method 3 in the proposed rule.
If Calculation Method 2 is elected for pneumatic devices, we are
proposing that all pneumatic devices that are vented directly to the
atmosphere present at the facility (except those for which natural gas
supply is measured according to Calculation Method 1) would have to be
measured at regular intervals and that for a well-pad, gathering and
boosting site, or facility, as applicable, selected to be measured that
year, all pneumatic devices that vent to the atmosphere must be
measured according to Calculation Method 2 (except those for which
natural gas supply is measured according to Calculation Method 1). For
facilities in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production and in
the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry
segments, a complete cycle of measurements would be required to be
completed in no more than 5 years, and we are proposing that the number
of pneumatic devices measured each year be approximately equal. We
selected a 5-year interval for Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
facilities because of the high number of devices at these facilities
and the time needed to measure all natural gas pneumatic devices.
Additionally, we are proposing that when measurements are conducted at
a particular well-pad or gathering and boosting site, all pneumatic
devices at that well-pad or gathering and boosting site must be
measured in the same year. This would help enhance the
representativeness of the measurement data.
For facilities in the Onshore Natural Gas Processing, Onshore
Natural Gas Transmission Compression, Underground Natural Gas Storage,
and Natural Gas Distribution industry segments, we are proposing the
measurement interval to be dependent on the number of devices at the
facility. For facilities with 25 or fewer natural gas pneumatic
devices, we are proposing measurement of all devices annually. For
facilities with 26 to 50 devices, we are proposing measurement of all
devices in a two-year period. The proposed interval period increases
with every 25 devices, until reaching a maximum cycle time of 5 years
for facilities with 101 or more natural gas pneumatic devices that are
vented directly to the atmosphere. The 25-device increment was selected
because we estimated that this would be the typical number of devices
that could be measured following the proposed methods in an 8-hour
period.
Under Calculation Method 2, we are proposing that each pneumatic
device vent measurement, except for isolation valve actuators, would be
conducted for a minimum of 15 minutes; measurements for pneumatic
isolation valve actuators would be conducted for a minimum of 5
minutes. We are proposing a reduced monitoring duration for isolation
valve actuators specifically because these devices actuate very
infrequently, and the monitoring is targeted to confirm the valve
actuators are not malfunctioning (i.e., emitting when not actuating)
rather than to develop an average emission rate considering some
limited number of actuations. We are proposing that, if there is a
measurable flow during the measurement period, the average flow rate
measured during the measurement period would be used as the average
flow rate for that device and multiplied by the total hours the device
is in service (i.e., supplied with natural gas) to calculate annual
emissions (by pneumatic device type). For continuous bleed devices, if
there is no measurable flow rate (i.e., flow rate is below the method
detection limit), we are proposing to require reporters to confirm the
device is in service when measured and that the device type is
correctly characterized. Once confirmed, we are proposing that the
device must be retested (if designated as a high bleed device) or the
manufacturer's steady state bleed rate must be used (if designated as a
low bleed device) to estimate the device's emissions. For intermittent
bleed devices, the lack of any emissions during a 5-minute or 15-minute
period, as applicable, would indicate that the device did not actuate
and that the device is seating correctly when not actuating. As such,
we are proposing that engineering calculations would be made to
estimate emissions per activation and that company records or
engineering estimates would be used to assess the number of actuations
per year to calculate the emissions from that device for the reporting
year.
Under Calculation Method 2, if vent measurements are made over
several years, we are proposing that all measurements made within a
multi-year measurement would be used to calculate a facility-specific
emission factor by device type (continuous high bleed, continuous low
bleed, and intermittent bleed). The emissions measurements for the
pneumatic device vents measured during the reporting year would be used
directly for those devices. We are proposing that reporters would use
the facility-specific emission factor developed from the cycle of
measurements times the number of devices (by type) at the facility that
were not measured during the reporting year to calculate the emissions
from the
[[Page 50312]]
pneumatic devices that were not measured during the reporting year.
Reporters using proposed Calculation Method 2 would report for each
well-pad, gathering and boosting site, or facility, as applicable, the
total number of natural gas pneumatic devices by type, the number of
years in the measurement cycle, the number of devices by measured in
the reporting year, the value of the emissions factor for the reporting
year as calculated using equation W-1A and the devices upon which the
emission factor is based, the average time the devices were in service
(i.e., supplied with natural gas) during the calendar year, and the GHG
emissions for each type of natural gas pneumatic device.
We are proposing calculation and reporting requirements for
Calculation Method 2 for pneumatic pumps in proposed 40 CFR
98.233(c)(2) and proposed 40 CFR 98.236(c)(4), respectively, that are
similar to the proposed Calculation Method 2 requirements for pneumatic
devices, with differences described as follows. First, only facilities
in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production and in the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry segments are
currently required to report emissions from pneumatic pumps and based
on the analysis performed as described in section III.C.1 of this
preamble and documented in the subpart W TSD, we are not proposing to
add this source type for any other industry segment. Therefore,
proposed Calculation Method 2 for pneumatic pumps only includes the
provisions for a 5-year cycle and does not include the measurement
cycles for other industry segments. The 5-year cycle is being proposed
for natural gas driven pneumatic pumps for the same reason that it is
being proposed for pneumatic devices (i.e., a few facilities have a
high number of pumps, and the time needed to measure all of the pumps
in a single year would be excessive). To minimize the burden while
still collecting sufficient data to calculate sufficiently accurate
emissions, we are proposing an approach similar to the current approach
that Natural Gas Distribution facilities may use to conduct equipment
leak surveys. Second, the proposal specifies that reporters would
measure for a minimum of 5 minutes while liquid is continuously being
pumped. Five minutes is currently specified for other emission
measurements in the rule (e.g., leak rates from transmission storage
tank vents in existing 40 CFR 98.233(k)(2), which are condensate
storage tank vents in this proposal). Typically, emissions from pumps
are expected to be greater than leak rates from transmission storage
tank leaks. Thus, it is expected that a sufficient volume of sample
would be collected in 5 minutes of pump operation to be measurable with
sufficient accuracy. Third, we are proposing that the emissions would
be calculated as the product of the measured natural gas flow rate and
the number of hours the pneumatic pump was pumping. Under proposed
Calculation Method 2 for pneumatic pumps, proposed reporting data
elements in 40 CFR 98.236(c)(4) per well-pad or gathering and boosting
site would include the number of years in the measurement cycle; an
indication of whether emissions were measured or calculated; the
primary measurement method (when emissions were measured); the value of
the calculated emissions factor, the total number of pumps measured and
used in calculating the emission factor, the number of pumps that
vented to atmosphere, and the estimated average number of hours per
year that the vented pumps were pumping liquid (when the emissions were
calculated); the total measured CO2 and CH4
emissions; and the total calculated CO2 and CH4
emissions.
We request comment on whether the option of up to a 5-year cycle is
appropriate for all facilities in the onshore production and gathering
and boosting industry segments. If a shorter time frame would be
appropriate, we request comment on how long the maximum cycle should be
and why that length of time would be adequate. We also request comment
on the proposed sampling period of 5 minutes. If a longer test period
would be needed or a shorter time period would be sufficient to collect
representative emissions data, we request comment on what time period
would be appropriate and the reasons why that test time would be
appropriate. Finally, we request comment on suggestions for other
approaches to emissions measurement that might be more effective and
better achieve the goal of obtaining accurate vented emissions data
from natural gas driven pneumatic pumps.
2. Intermittent Bleed Pneumatic Device Surveys
As part of our review to characterize pneumatic device emissions,
we found a significant difference in the emissions from intermittent
bleed pneumatic devices that appeared to be functioning as intended
(short, small releases during device actuation) and those that appeared
to be malfunctioning (continuously emitting or exhibiting large or
prolonged releases upon actuation). For natural gas intermittent bleed
pneumatic devices, it is possible to identify malfunctioning devices
through routine monitoring using OGI or other technologies. As noted in
the introduction to section II of this preamble, the EPA recently
proposed NSPS OOOOb and EG OOOOc for oil and natural gas sources. Under
the proposed standards in NSPS OOOOb and the proposed presumptive
standards in EG OOOOc (which would inform the state plans or, if
necessary, the Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62), nearly all covered
pneumatic devices (continuous bleed and intermittent vent) would be
required to have a CH4 (and, for NSPS OOOOb only, VOC)
emission rate of zero. The only proposed exception would be for
pneumatic devices in Alaska at locations where on-site power is not
available, in which case owners and operators would be required to use
low bleed pneumatic devices in place of high bleed pneumatic devices
(unless a high bleed device is needed for a functional need such as
safety), and to verify that any intermittent bleed pneumatic devices
operate such that they do not vent when idle by monitoring these
devices during the fugitive emissions survey.
We envision relatively few intermittent bleed pneumatic devices
that vent GHG to the atmosphere under the proposed zero-emission
standard and presumptive standard for these pneumatic devices,
compliance with which would require the use of technology to achieve
the zero-emission standard. As noted in the previous paragraph, we
proposed in NSPS OOOOb and EG OOOOc to require periodic monitoring of
those few intermittent bleed pneumatic devices in Alaska. In addition,
as noted in section II of this preamble, the proposed amendments that
would apply to sources subject to the NSPS OOOOb and approved state
plans or applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62 would not become
effective for individual reporters unless and until their emission
sources become subject to and are required to comply with either the
final NSPS OOOOb or an approved state plan or applicable Federal plan
in 40 CFR part 62. Prior to that time, a reporter may elect to conduct
inspections or surveys of their intermittent bleed pneumatic devices.
Therefore, the EPA is proposing amendments to subpart W to provide an
alternative methodology to calculate emissions from intermittent bleed
pneumatic devices based on the results of inspections or surveys,
consistent with section II.B of this
[[Page 50313]]
preamble. Specifically, we are proposing to provide in 40 CFR
98.233(a)(3) an alternative calculation methodology for facilities that
monitor for malfunctioning intermittent bleed pneumatic devices
analogous to a ``leaker factor'' approach used for equipment leaks. We
included this ``leaker factor'' approach in the 2022 Proposed Rule;
however, we are proposing revisions to the ``leaker factors'' terms
included in the calculation approach using peer reviewed study data. We
are proposing to refer to this monitoring/leaker factor approach as
Calculation Method 3 for pneumatic devices.
If Calculation Method 3 is elected, we are proposing that all
intermittent bleed pneumatic devices that vent to the atmosphere at the
well-pad, gathering and boosting site, or facility, as applicable,
would be required to be monitored according to the leak detection
methods in 40 CFR 98.234(a)(1) through (3), but with a monitoring
duration of at least 2 minutes or until a malfunction is identified.
Based on our review of the measurement studies that identified
malfunctioning intermittent bleed devices, we found that most
malfunctioning devices could be identified using a 2-minute monitoring
duration, but malfunctioning devices could not be identified
effectively using a typical ``leak survey'' monitoring duration, which
is on the order of a few seconds. However, if a pneumatic device is
observed to be malfunctioning in the first minute, there is no need to
continue to monitor that device. Therefore, we are proposing that a
minimum monitoring duration of 2 minutes or until a malfunction is
identified be used for the purpose of identifying malfunctioning
intermittent bleed pneumatic controllers.
Under Calculation Method 3, we are proposing that all intermittent
bleed pneumatic devices that are vented directly to the atmosphere
present at the facility (except those for which natural gas supply is
measured according to Calculation Method 1) would have to be monitored
to identify malfunctioning devices at regular intervals, with a
complete cycle of measurements being completed in no more than 5 years
for facilities in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production and
in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segments. Additionally, we are proposing that when monitoring
is conducted at a particular well-pad or gathering and boosting site,
all pneumatic devices at that well-pad or gathering and boosting site
must be monitored in the same year. This would help enhance the
representativeness of the measurement data. For facilities in the
Onshore Natural Gas Processing, Onshore Natural Gas Transmission
Compression, Underground Natural Gas Storage, and Natural Gas
Distribution industry segments, we are proposing the monitoring
interval to be dependent on the number of intermittent bleed pneumatic
devices at the facility. For facilities with 100 or fewer natural gas
intermittent bleed pneumatic devices, we are proposing monitoring of
all devices annually. For facilities with 101 to 200 devices, we are
proposing measurement of all devices in a 2-year period. The proposed
interval period increases with every 100 devices, until reaching a
maximum cycle time of 5 years for facilities with 401 or more natural
gas pneumatic devices vented directly to the atmosphere. The 100-device
increment was selected because we estimated that this would be the
typical number of devices that could be monitored following the
proposed methods in an 8-hour period. For all industry segments, we are
proposing that, if you elect to monitor your pneumatic devices over
multiple years, you must monitor approximately the same number of
devices each year.
Under Calculation Method 3, if a ``leak'' is observed from the
intermittent bleed pneumatic device for more than 5 seconds during a
device actuation, then the device is considered to be
``malfunctioning'' and the malfunctioning device emission factor
(similar to a leaker emission factor) would be applied to that device.
Emissions from intermittent bleed pneumatic devices that were not
observed to be malfunctioning would be calculated based on the default
emission factor for ``properly functioning'' intermittent bleed
pneumatic devices. We are proposing in the definition of the variable
``Tz'' in proposed equation W-1C that the time that a device
is assumed to be malfunctioning would be determined following the same
procedures as the determination of the duration of equipment leaks
identified during a leak survey conducted under 40 CFR 98.233(q) (see
the variable ``Tp,z'' in equation W-30 for equipment leaks).
For example, if only one survey of intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices is conducted during the reporting year, then any
device found to be malfunctioning during the survey would be required
to be assumed to be malfunctioning for the entire year.
If a complete survey of intermittent bleed pneumatic devices is
completed over multiple years, we are proposing equation W-1D be used
to calculate the emissions. As proposed, this equation uses the ratio
of the number of intermittent bleed devices identified to be
malfunctioning during the current reporting year to the total number of
intermittent bleed devices monitored during the reporting year to
estimate the number of malfunctioning and properly functioning
intermittent bleed devices for the intermittent bleed devices that were
not monitored during the reporting year.
Under Calculation Method 3, we are proposing that emissions from
continuous bleed pneumatic controllers (other than those for which the
natural gas supply flow is measured as specified in Calculation Method
1) would be determined either by annually measuring the emissions from
the pneumatic device vent following the methods provided in Calculation
Method 2 or by using applicable default population emission factors for
continuous high bleed and continuous low bleed pneumatic devices.
Reporters using proposed Calculation Method 3 would report for each
the well-pad, gathering and boosting site, or facility, as applicable,
the total number of natural gas pneumatic devices by type, the method
used to estimate emissions from continuous bleed natural gas pneumatic
devices, the frequency of monitoring for intermittent devices, the
number of years in a monitoring cycle, the number of devices at the
facility, the number monitored in the reporting year, the number found
to be malfunctioning, the average time the malfunctioning devices were
assumed to be malfunctioning under proposed 40 CFR 98.236(b)(5), the
average time that devices that were monitored but were not detected as
malfunctioning year were in service (i.e., supplied with natural gas)
during the calendar year, and the GHG emissions for each type of
natural gas pneumatic device.
For more information regarding this proposed alternative
calculation methodology for natural gas intermittent bleed pneumatic
devices, see the subpart W TSD, available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
3. Revisions to Emission Factors
As noted in section III.E of this preamble, subpart W currently
requires calculation of GHG emissions from natural gas pneumatic device
venting using default population emission factors multiplied by the
number of devices and the average time those devices are ``in-service''
(i.e., supplied with natural gas). Correspondingly, the current default
population factors for natural gas pneumatic devices were
[[Page 50314]]
developed by taking both periods of actuation and periods without
actuation into account. Subpart W provides two sets of pneumatic device
emission factors, one for devices in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural
Gas Production and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and
Boosting industry segments and one for the Onshore Natural Gas
Transmission Compression and Underground Natural Gas Storage industry
segments. Each set of emission factors consists of emission factors for
three different types of natural gas pneumatic devices: continuous low
bleed devices, continuous high bleed devices, and intermittent bleed
devices.\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\65\ The development of the current emission factors for natural
gas pneumatic devices is described in Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Reporting from the Petroleum And Natural Gas Industry: Background
Technical Support Document, U.S. EPA, November 2010, (Docket Id. No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0923-3610), also available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA has become aware of several studies on emissions from
natural gas pneumatic device vents since subpart W was first
promulgated. For example, in April 2015, the EPA reviewed three
recently published studies on emissions from pneumatic devices (also
referred to as ``pneumatic controllers'' within the studies as well as
in NSPS OOOOa, proposed NSPS OOOOb, and proposed EG OOOOc) at onshore
production facilities and evaluated those studies for use in the U.S.
GHG Inventory.\66\ As part of this proposed rulemaking, we have
reviewed these and other available studies to evaluate the potential
for revisions to the natural gas pneumatic device emission factors in
subpart W. As part of our review, we found there are significantly more
data available now by which to characterize pneumatic device emissions.
Therefore, consistent with section II.B of this preamble, we are
proposing to amend the emission factors for all industry segments for
which emissions from natural gas pneumatic device vents must be
calculated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\66\ U.S. EPA. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and
Sinks: Potential Revisions to Pneumatic Controller Emissions
Estimate (Production Segment). April 2015. Available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-12/documents/ng-petro-inv-improvement-pneumatic-controllers-4-10-2015.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under Calculation Method 3 for pneumatic devices, default
population emission factors can be used for continuous bleed devices.
Therefore, for continuous low bleed pneumatic devices, we are proposing
an emission factor of 6.8 standard cubic feet per hour per device (scf/
hr/device) based on the available measurement data, which considers
devices that may be malfunctioning (i.e., having higher steady state
bleed rates than specified by the manufacturer) for all applicable
industry segments in proposed Table W-1. For continuous high bleed
pneumatic devices, we are proposing different population emission
factors depending on the applicable industry segment. For facilities in
the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production and in the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry segments, we
are proposing an emission factor of 21 scf/hr/device for continuous
high bleed devices in existing Table W-1A (proposed Table W-1) based on
study data for these industry segments. For facilities in the Onshore
Natural Gas Processing, Onshore Natural Gas Transmission Compression,
Underground Natural Gas Storage, and Natural Gas Distribution industry
segments, we are proposing an emission factor of 30 scf/hr/device for
continuous high bleed devices in proposed Table W-1 based on study data
from transmission compression stations. These proposed continuous bleed
emission factors consider emissions from pneumatic devices based on
measurements while the devices are in service, not just actuating.
Because none of the three proposed calculation methods described in
section III.E.1 and 2 of this preamble would allow the use of the
current default population emission factor methodology for intermittent
bleed pneumatic devices, we are proposing to remove the population
emission factors for intermittent bleed pneumatic devices from existing
Tables W-1A, W-3B, and W-4B and not include them in proposed Table W-1.
The EPA requests comment on whether the EPA should instead retain the
use of default population emission factors as an alternative
calculation methodology (as Calculation Method 4) for sites, i.e.
include in the final rule an option for sites to not conduct
measurements or monitor intermittent bleed devices. If the population
emission factor calculation method is retained, the EPA requests
comment on the appropriate intermittent bleed pneumatic device emission
factors to include in the final rule. Based on our review of the
recently published pneumatic device study data, we would consider
revising the intermittent bleed pneumatic device emission factor for
facilities in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production and in
the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry
segments to 8.8 scf/hr/device. This emission factor considers emissions
from pneumatic devices based on measurements while the devices are in
service, not just actuating, and may include emissions from devices
that were malfunctioning during the time of the measurement. We have
limited new data specific to intermittent bleed pneumatic devices for
other industry segments. We would consider retaining the intermittent
bleed pneumatic device emission factor of 2.3 scf/hr/device for
facilities in other applicable industry segments; however, this
emission factor is based on engineering calculations and would likely
underestimate emissions from devices that are malfunctioning (e.g.,
bleeding continuously or bleeding more than expected during an
actuation). The EPA requests comment and supporting data regarding
potential revisions to the intermittent bleed pneumatic device
population emission factors, if the use of population emission factors
as a calculation methodology is retained.
For more information regarding this review and development of the
proposed emission factors, see the subpart W TSD, available in the
docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
Finally, we note that we are not proposing to revise or remove the
default population emission factor in existing Table W-1A (proposed
Table W-1) for natural gas driven pneumatic pumps. Reporters that do
not have or elect to install a flow meter on the natural gas supply
line dedicated to any one or more natural gas driven pneumatic pumps
and that do not elect to measure the volumetric flow rate of emissions
from all the natural gas driven pneumatic pumps vented directly to the
atmosphere at a well-pad or gathering and boosting site would be
required to continue using the current default population emission
factor for pneumatic pumps vented directly to the atmosphere, as
proposed Calculation Method 3. The existing emission factor is based on
the average stroke volumes and frequencies for a range of typical
pumps.\67\ In contrast to some other equipment for which emission
factors are currently used to calculate emissions (e.g., intermittent
bleed pneumatic devices), the emissions per unit of operating time for
a given pump are not expected to vary significantly due to malfunctions
as the pump ages. As such, we expect the natural gas
[[Page 50315]]
driven pneumatic pump emission factor to provide an acceptably accurate
estimate of the average hourly emissions from natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps. For this reason, we are proposing to retain the
emission factor calculation method for this source type.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\67\ Methane Emissions from the Natural Gas Industry, Volume 13:
Chemical Injection Pumps, Final Report. GRI-94/0257.30 and EPA-600/
R-96-080m. Gas Research Institute and U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. June 1996. Available in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the 2022 Proposed Rule we proposed clarifying the definition of
the time parameter in equation W-2 of the current rule. The current
definition is the ``average estimated number of hours in the operating
year that the pumps were operational.'' We proposed changing the word
``operational'' to ``in service (i.e., supplied with natural gas).''
This change was proposed to be consistent with the proposed change to
the time term in equation W-1 for pneumatic devices. This change was
proposed for the pneumatic device equation because the specified
emission factors were developed based on emission measurement tests
conducted over periods when the devices were actuating as well as
periods when they were not actuating (i.e., theoretical steady-state
continuous bleeding, or for intermittent devices, when they
theoretically were not emitting). However, after further review, we
determined that the current emission factor for pneumatic pumps was
developed based on observations of pump operation at several production
facilities (e.g., stroke rates and frequency of pump use) and pump
manufacturer data (e.g., gas consumption per volume of chemical pumped,
plunger diameter, and stroke length) for a variety of chemical
injection pumps.\68\ This means the emission factor represents
emissions when pumps are actuating, or, in other words, when they are
actively pumping liquid. Thus, we are now proposing to clarify the
definition of the term ``T'' in current equation W-2 (equation W-2B in
proposed 40 CFR 98.233(c)) by replacing the word ``operational'' with
``pumping liquid.'' We request comment on the potential for natural gas
to leak through a pump to the atmosphere when the pump is not actively
pumping liquid and the mechanism for such leakage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\68\ Methane Emissions from the Natural Gas Industry, Volume 13:
Chemical Injection Pumps, Final Report. GRI-94/0257.30 and EPA-600/
R-96-080m. Gas Research Institute and U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. June 1996. Available in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Hours of Operation of Natural Gas Pneumatic Devices
In correspondence with the EPA via e-GGRT, some reporters have
indicated that they are interpreting the term ``operational'' in the
definition of variable ``Tt'' in equation W-1 in 40 CFR
98.233(a) and the term ``operating'' in the reporting requirements in
40 CFR 98.236(b)(2) differently than the EPA intended. Both the current
emission factors and the proposed calculation methodologies described
in sections III.E.1 through III.E.3 of this preamble for natural gas
pneumatic devices were developed by taking both periods of actuation
and periods without actuation into account; \69\ in other words, the
emission factors are population emission factors considering all times
when the device was connected to natural gas supply line. To calculate
emissions accurately using the existing population emission factor, the
average number of hours used in equation W-1 should be the number of
hours that the devices of a particular type are in service (i.e., the
devices are receiving a measurement signal and connected to a natural
gas supply that is capable of actuating a valve or other device as
needed). Similarly, based on the calculation methodology for the site-
specific population emission factor in Calculation Method 2 or for the
leaker emission factor approach proposed in Calculation Method 3, the
number of hours that the devices of a particular type are in service
(i.e., the devices are receiving a measurement signal and connected to
a natural gas supply that is capable of actuating a valve or other
device as needed) must be used in the calculation, Therefore,
consistent with section II.D of this preamble, we are proposing to
revise the definition of variable ``Tt'' in existing
equation W-1 (proposed equation W-1B) in 40 CFR 98.233 and the
corresponding reporting requirements in proposed 40 CFR
98.236(b)(4)(ii)(C)(4), (b)(4)(iii)(C)(4), and (b)(5)(i)(C)(2) to use
the term ``in service (i.e., supplied with natural gas)'' rather than
``operational'' or ``operating,'' to clarify the original and current
intended meaning of that variable and term. We are also proposing to
use this ``in service'' language for the time variables in the newly
proposed equations W-1C and W-1D for the leaker factor approach for
intermittent bleed pneumatic devices under Calculation Method 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\69\ As noted previously, the development of the current
emission factors for natural gas pneumatic devices is described in
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting from the Petroleum And Natural
Gas Industry: Background Technical Support Document, U.S. EPA,
November 2010, (Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0923-3610), also
available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Natural Gas Pneumatic Devices and Natural Gas Driven Pneumatic Pumps
Routed to Control
We understand that emissions from some natural gas pneumatic
devices and/or natural gas driven pneumatic pumps are routed to control
(i.e., a flare, combustion unit, or vapor recovery system). The
population emission factor is based on natural gas vented directly to
the atmosphere from these pneumatic devices/pumps and does not
accurately reflect emissions from controlled pneumatic devices/pumps.
Therefore, consistent with section II.B of this preamble, we are
proposing to revise 40 CFR 98.233(a) and (c) to clarify requirements
for calculating emissions from natural gas pneumatic devices and
natural gas driven pneumatic pumps, respectively, that are vented
directly to the atmosphere versus pneumatic devices/pumps that are
routed to control, consistent with the intent of the current rule. We
are proposing revisions to 40 CFR 98.233(a) and (c) to clarify that the
existing population emission factor calculation methodology is intended
to apply only to pneumatic devices/pumps vented directly to the
atmosphere. The proposed new calculation methodologies described in
sections III.E.1 and 2 of this preamble also specify that they apply
only to pneumatic devices/pumps vented directly to the atmosphere.
We are proposing that flared emissions from natural gas pneumatic
devices or pumps are not required to be calculated and reported
separately from other flared emissions. We are proposing to specify
that instead emission streams from natural gas pneumatic devices or
pumps that are routed to flares are required to be included in the
calculation of total emissions from the flare according to the
procedures in 40 CFR 98.233(n) and reported as part of the total flare
stack emissions according to the procedures in 40 CFR 98.236(n), in the
same manner as emission streams from other source types that are routed
to the flare. Similarly, we are proposing that emissions from natural
gas pneumatic devices or pumps that are routed to a combustion unit are
required to be combined with other streams of the same fuel type and
used to calculate total emissions from the combustion unit as specified
in 40 CFR 98.233(z) and reported as part of the total emissions from
the combustion unit as specified in 40 CFR 98.236(z). We are also
proposing reporters would not calculate or report emissions from
natural gas pneumatic devices or pumps if the emissions are routed to
vapor
[[Page 50316]]
recovery and are not subsequently routed to a combustion device (e.g.,
are routed back to process or sales).
We are also proposing to require in proposed 40 CFR 98.236(b)(2)
and 98.236(c)(2) reporting of the total number of continuous low bleed,
continuous high bleed, and intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic
devices and the total number of natural gas driven pneumatic pumps at
the site (regardless of vent disposition), the number of these devices/
pumps that are vented to the atmosphere for at least a portion of the
year, and the number of these devices/pumps that are routed to control
for at least a portion of the year (which includes natural gas
pneumatic devices/pumps routed to a flare, combustion unit, or vapor
recovery system). The total count of pneumatic devices or pumps is a
proposed reporting element because the total count may not always be
equal to the sum of the other two counts. For example, a reporter that
switches from atmospheric venting to routing to control during a year
for a particular pneumatic device or pump would include that pneumatic
device or pump in both the count of devices or pumps that vent directly
to atmosphere and in the count of devices or pumps that are routed to
flares. However, that pneumatic device or pump would only be counted
once towards the total number of pneumatic devices or pumps, allowing
us to discern the number of devices or pumps that exclusively vent or
exclusively route to control. The number of pneumatic devices or pumps
vented directly to the atmosphere would be used in the verification of
annual reports to the GHGRP. The total count of pneumatic devices or
pumps at the facility and the number of pneumatic devices or pumps that
are routed to a flare, combustion, or vapor recovery would provide the
EPA with information to better characterize emissions from this source,
including how many pneumatic devices or pumps are controlled across the
industry and how the use of controls for pneumatic pumps changes across
multiple years.
F. Acid Gas Removal Unit Vents
1. Reporting of Methane Emissions From Acid Gas Removal Units
Reporters currently report only CO2 emissions from AGR
vents using one of the four calculation methodologies provided in 40
CFR 98.233(d). In the 2010 subpart W TSD, the EPA explained that
``CH4 emissions from AGR vents are insignificant, 0.06
percent of the total volume of CO2 and CH4
emissions,'' leading to the decision at that time not to require
reporting of CH4 emissions from AGR vents.\70\ However, as
described in more detail later in this section, both the number and
size of the AGRs reported to the GHGRP in recent years are greater than
the values used in that initial assessment, so current nationwide
CH4 emissions are likely greater than estimated in the 2010
subpart W TSD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\70\ Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting from the Petroleum And
Natural Gas Industry: Background Technical Support Document, U.S.
EPA, November 2010, (Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0923-3610), also
available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To determine the potential sources to be evaluated for inclusion in
the original subpart W, the EPA used the emissions for the year 2006 as
published in the 2008 U.S. GHG Inventory.\71\ As documented in the 2010
subpart W TSD, the EPA estimated that AGR vents emitted 643 MMscf of
CH4 that year, which corresponds generally to the 12,380 mt
CH4 from AGR vents shown in Table A-114 of the 2008 U.S. GHG
Inventory. The inputs for that estimate include the emission factor for
AGR vents from Volume 14: Glycol Dehydrators of the 1996 GRI/EPA study
(available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2023-0234), and an estimate of about 290 AGRs at processing plants,
scaled from the 1992 estimate of 371 AGRs presented in the GRI/EPA
study. However, the emission factor in the 1996 GRI/EPA study is based
on an AGR throughput of about 35 MMscf per day, while the average feed
rate of the AGRs reported at onshore natural gas processing plants in
RY2021 was around 78 MMscf per day and the average feed rate of all
reported AGRs in RY2021 was around 59 MMscf per day. In addition, there
were 391 AGRs reported at onshore natural gas processing plants and 579
total AGRs reported in RY2021. In other words, the total quantity of
natural gas treated in AGRs in RY2021 at onshore natural gas processing
plants was about three times the total amount of natural gas estimated
to be treated by the 2008 U.S. GHG Inventory. Therefore, the
CH4 emissions from AGR vents are likely to be significantly
greater than estimated in the 2010 subpart W TSD, and as such, the EPA
is proposing to amend 40 CFR 98.233(d) and 98.236(d) to require
calculation and reporting of those emissions. The proposed inclusion of
reporting for emissions of CH4 from AGR vents would improve
the coverage of total CH4 emissions reported to subpart W,
consistent with section II.A of this preamble. For more information on
the estimation of potential CH4 emissions from AGR vents,
see the subpart W TSD, available in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\71\ U.S. EPA. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and
Sinks 1990-2006. April 2008. Available at https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks-1990-2006 and in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are four calculation methods currently provided in 40 CFR
98.233(d) for calculating CO2 emissions from AGR vents.
Calculation Method 1 is to use a continuous emissions monitoring system
(CEMS) if one is installed (40 CFR 98.233(d)(1)), and Calculation
Method 2 requires the use of a vent flow meter if there is one
installed that is not part of a CEMS and use either a continuous gas
analyzer or quarterly gas samples for composition (40 CFR
98.233(d)(2)). If neither a CEMS nor a vent flow meter is installed,
reporters currently may use Calculation Method 3, engineering equations
(40 CFR 98.233(d)(3)), or Calculation Method 4, modeling simulation via
software (40 CFR 98.233(d)(4)).
As part of this proposal, the EPA evaluated the existing
calculation methods for the purpose of proposing to require
CH4 emissions from AGR vents, and based on that assessment,
Calculation Methods 2, 3, and 4, are generally appropriate to use for
CH4. Calculation Method 1 is not considered an option for
CH4 because the EPA is not currently aware of continuous
CH4 monitors that meet the EPA's criteria for CEMS.\72\
Therefore, the EPA is proposing to specify that reporters must use
Calculation Method 2 to calculate CH4 emissions if they have
a vent flow meter installed (including the flow meter of a
CO2 CEMS) and is proposing to revise the subscripts of the
variables in equation W-3 slightly to specify that reporters should
calculate both CO2 and CH4. If there is no vent
flow meter, the EPA is proposing that reporters would choose between
Calculation Method 3 or Calculation Method 4. For Calculation Method 4,
the EPA is proposing to add the CH4 content of the feed
natural gas and the outlet natural gas as parameters that must be used
to characterize emissions. This specification is analogous to the
existing requirement to use acid gas content of the feed natural gas
and the acid gas content of outlet natural gas to characterize
CO2 emissions. For Calculation Method 3, the EPA is
proposing to revise the existing equations W-4A and W-4B and to add
[[Page 50317]]
a new equation W-4C. With the addition of CH4 as a component
for these equations, reporters would need to have information on four
parameters rather than the three they currently need to know. For more
information on the derivation of these proposed equations, see the
subpart W TSD, available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id.
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234. We request comment on whether these are the
appropriate methods for calculating CH4 from AGR vents,
including whether there are continuous CH4 monitors that
meet the EPA's criteria for CEMS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\72\ See https://www.epa.gov/emc/emc-continuous-emission-monitoring-systems for more information on CEMS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although we used the 1996 GRI/EPA emission factor to assess the
potential magnitude of CH4 emissions from AGR vents, both in
the 2010 subpart W TSD and for an initial assessment of whether to
include additional reporting requirements in this proposal, we are not
proposing use of that emission factor as a method for calculating
emissions under subpart W. That emission factor is based on modeling of
an average system from many years ago, and as discussed earlier in this
section, the model AGR is much smaller than the AGRs reported to
subpart W more recently. The emission factor is per AGR, so it does not
take into account the feed rate of the AGR, the concentration of
CO2 entering the unit, or the level of treatment (i.e.,
concentration of CO2 exiting the unit).
The EPA is also proposing to add relevant reporting elements for
CH4 from each AGR to 40 CFR 98.236(d). The additional data
elements include annual CH4 emissions vented directly to the
atmosphere; annual average volumetric fraction of CH4 in the
vent gas if using Calculation Method 2; additional inputs for
Calculation Method 3, depending on the equation used (i.e., as
applicable, the annual average volumetric fraction of CH4 in
the natural gas flowing out of the AGR, annual average volumetric
fraction of CH4 content in natural gas flowing into the AGR,
annual average volumetric fraction of CO2 in the vent gas
exiting the AGR and annual average volumetric fraction of
CH4 in the vent gas exiting the AGR); and the CH4
content of the feed natural gas and outlet natural gas if using
Calculation Method 4.
Finally, we note that under the current provisions of subpart W,
reporters with AGRs routed to flares are required to report the
CO2 emissions from the AGR that pass through the flare as
AGR vent emissions, and the emissions that result from combustion of
any CH4 in the AGR vent stream are reported as flare stack
emissions. In the 2022 Proposed Rule, we proposed to provide more
clarity regarding how to determine the flow rate and composition of the
gas routed to a flare if Calculation Method 3 or 4 were used to
calculate CO2 emissions. Because we are proposing to require
reporting of CH4 emissions from AGR vents, there would be no
reason for subpart W to include special provisions for AGR vents routed
to flares that are different from the provisions for all other emission
source types routed to flares. Instead, the EPA is proposing that AGR
vents routed to a flare would follow the same calculation requirements
as other emission source types and would begin reporting flared AGR
emissions (CO2, CH4, and N2O) separately from
vented AGR emissions (CO2 and CH4). See section
III.N of this preamble for more information on the proposed flaring
calculation and reporting provisions. In a similar amendment, we are
proposing to specify that AGR vents routed to an engine would calculate
CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions using the provisions
of 98.233(z) or subpart C, whichever is applicable to that industry
segment. We are also proposing that AGRs routed to a flare or engine
for the entire year would report the information in proposed 40 CFR
98.236(d)(1) except for the calculation method, the indication of
whether any CO2 emissions were recovered and transferred
offsite, and the CO2 and CH4 emissions from the
unit. If the AGR routed to a flare or an engine only for part of the
year, the other information in proposed 40 CFR 98.236(d)(1) would be
required to be reported for the part of the year in which emissions
were vented directly to the atmosphere.
2. Calculation Method 4
Reporters with AGRs that elect to calculate emissions using
Calculation Method 4 are currently required to calculate emissions
using any standard simulation software package that uses the Peng-
Robinson equation of state and speciates CO2 emissions.
According to existing 40 CFR 98.233(c)(4), the information that must be
used to characterize emissions include natural gas feed temperature,
pressure, flow rate, and acid gas content; outlet natural gas acid gas
content and temperature; unit operating hours; and solvent temperature,
pressure, circulation rate, and weight. These parameters currently must
be determined for typical operating conditions over the calendar year
by engineering estimate and process knowledge based on best available
data. Consistent with section II.B of this preamble, we are proposing
that the input parameters related to the natural gas feed that are used
for the simulation software must be obtained by measurement. Those
parameters include natural gas feed temperature, pressure, flow rate,
acid gas content, CH4 content, and, for nitrogen removal
units, nitrogen content. We are proposing that reporters would collect
measurements reflective of representative operating conditions over the
time period covered by the simulation. We are not proposing to change
the requirement that the other parameters must be determined for
operating conditions based on engineering estimate and process
knowledge.
We are also proposing that the parameters that must be used to
characterize emissions should reflect operating conditions over the
time period covered by the simulation rather than just over the
calendar year. Under this proposed change, reporters could continue to
run the simulation once per year with parameters that are determined to
be representative of operating conditions over the entire year.
Alternatively, reporters would be allowed to conduct periodic
simulation runs to cover portions of the calendar year, as long as the
entire calendar year is covered. The reporter would then sum the
results at the end of the year to determine annual emissions. In that
case, the parameters for each simulation run would be determined for
the operating conditions over each corresponding portion of the
calendar year. Finally, we are proposing to clarify that the
information reported under 40 CFR 98.236(d)(2)(ii) should be provided
on an annual basis, either as an average across the year, or a total
for the year (in the case of operating hours for the unit).
We are also proposing an additional change to the reported data for
reporters with AGRs that elect to calculate emissions using Calculation
Method 4. One of the required inputs to report is the solvent weight,
in pounds per gallon (under existing 40 CFR 98.236(d)(2)(iii)(L)). A
variety of different solvents may be used in an AGR (e.g., chemical
solvents such as monoethanolamine (MEA) and methyl diethanolamine
(MDEA), physical solvents such as SelexolTM and
Rectisol[supreg]), and the solubility of CO2 varies across
the different types of solvent. Requiring reporters to provide solvent
characteristics provides information about the type of solvent used so
the emissions calculated by the modeling run could be verified.
However, the ``solvent weight'' is the only data element related to the
identification of the solvent that is currently collected, and the
values reported across all reporters have been inconsistent over the
last few years, indicating that this data element is
[[Page 50318]]
likely not clear to reporters (e.g., some reporters appear to be
providing the density of the solvent and others appear to be providing
the amine concentration in weight percent). In addition, the densities
of common amine-based solvents are fairly close in value, so even among
reporters that are providing values within the expected range of
solvent densities, we have found it difficult to use this data element
to identify the solvent type. Finally, the current requirement to
report solvent weight does not specify how this value should be
determined, but given the precise values being reported, it appears
that reporters are either measuring the solvent or reporting a specific
value provided by the vendor.
Therefore, we are proposing to replace the existing requirement to
report solvent weight with a requirement (proposed 40 CFR
98.236(d)(2)(iii)(N)) to report the solvent type and, for amine-based
solvents, the general composition. Reporters would choose the solvent
type option from a pre-defined list that most closely matches the
solvent type and, for amine-based solvents, the general composition,
used in their AGR. The standardized response options would include the
following: ``SelexolTM,'' ``Rectisol[supreg],''
``PurisolTM,'' ``Fluor SolventSM,''
``BenfieldTM,'' ``20 wt% MEA,'' ``30 wt% MEA,'' ``40 wt%
MDEA,'' ``50 wt% MDEA,'' and ``Other (specify).'' We are proposing to
use commercially available trade names in this list rather than
chemical compositions, as the trade names are more commonly used among
AGR operators and therefore more readily available. This proposed
amendment to collect standardized information about the solvent is
expected to result in more useful data that would improve verification
of reported data and better characterize AGR vent emissions, consistent
with section II.C of this preamble. It would also improve the quality
of the data reported compared to the apparently inconsistent
application of the current requirements. In addition, the solvent type
and composition rarely change from one year to the next, so once the
data element is reported the first time, most reporters would be able
to copy the response from the previous year's reporting form each year.
Therefore, the proposal to require reporters to select a solvent type
and composition from these standardized responses is also expected to
improve verification and the consistency of reported data compared to
the current requirement, consistent with section II.C of this preamble.
In the event that reporters use more than one type of solvent in their
AGR during the year, the proposed reporting requirement specifies that
reporters would select the option that corresponds to the solvent used
for the majority of the year.
3. Reporting of Flow Rates
We are proposing several amendments to improve the quality and
verification of AGR flow rate information, consistent with sections
II.C of this preamble. Reporters are currently required to report the
total feed rate entering the AGR in units of million cubic feet per
year (existing 40 CFR 98.236(d)(1)(iii), proposed 40 CFR
98.236(d)(1)(iv)). The existing rule does not specify million standard
cubic feet per year or million actual cubic feet per year, so reporters
may provide this feed rate in either of those units of measure.
However, there is not currently a requirement for reporters to provide
the actual temperature and pressure for the total feed rate if it is
reported in million actual cubic feet, so it is difficult for the EPA
to tell which are the correct units of measure. Reporters also provide
flow rates that correspond with the calculation method chosen, and the
subpart W reporting form currently requests the temperature and
pressure corresponding to those flow rates, but they cannot necessarily
be used to clarify the units of measure for the total feed rate. For
example, for Calculation Method 1 or 2, reporters provide the annual
volume of gas vented from the AGR in cubic feet (existing 40 CFR
98.236(d)(2)(i)(B), proposed 40 CFR 98.236(d)(2)(i)(C)), but the
temperature and pressure of this vent gas does not correlate directly
to the temperature and pressure for the AGR feed rate. In addition,
while the reporting form requests the temperature and pressure
corresponding to various flow rates, those data elements are not
specifically included in 40 CFR 98.236(d), so there appears to be some
inconsistency between the flow rates reported and the temperature and
pressure reported. For example, in some cases, the flow rate appears to
be reported in standard cubic feet but the temperature and pressure
appear to represent actual conditions; in these cases, the temperature
and pressure may have been the values used to convert the flow rate
from actual conditions to the reported standard conditions, but it is
not clear. As a result, the EPA has found it difficult to verify the
AGR flow rates in some cases.
Therefore, we are first proposing to require that the total annual
feed rate that is required to be reported for all AGRs regardless of
the how the emissions are calculated (existing 40 CFR
98.236(d)(1)(iii), proposed 40 CFR 98.236(d)(1)(iv)) would be reported
at standard conditions (i.e., in units of MMscf per year). The
revisions would make the units of measure for this total annual feed
rate more consistent with the natural gas throughputs reported for each
industry segment in existing 40 CFR 98.236(aa) and would standardize
the units of measure for this total annual feed rate across all AGRs.
Stakeholders have previously indicated that standard industry practice
for either calculating or measuring the flow of gas into or out of an
AGR would be in standard conditions.\73\ Based on the data reported
from RY2015 to RY2021, the EPA estimates that at least 80 percent of
the AGR total annual feed rates were reported in MMscf per year (for
the remaining 20 percent of the AGRs, the EPA either was able to
determine that the AGR feed rate was reported in million actual cubic
feet per year, or it is unclear whether the feed rate was reported in
actual or standard conditions). Therefore, this proposed revision is
not expected to result in changes for the majority of the reporters but
would improve the quality of the overall data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\73\ E.g., see U.S. EPA. Response to Public Comments on
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: 2014 Revisions and Confidentiality
Determinations for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems, November 2014,
Comment EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0512-0084-A2, Excerpt Number 73.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, we are proposing to specifically require the temperature
and pressure that correspond to the flow rates reported for Calculation
Methods 1, 2, or 3 (reporters using Calculation Method 4 are already
required to report the temperature and pressure of the acid gas feed,
under existing 40 CFR 98.236(d)(2)(iii)(B) and (C)). Depending on the
calculation method selected, reporters are required to provide the vent
gas flow rate, flow rate of natural gas into the AGR, and/or the flow
rate of natural gas out of the AGR. The calculation methodologies in
existing 40 CFR 98.233(d)(1) through (3) and the reporting requirements
in existing 40 CFR 98.236(d)(2)(i) and (ii) accommodate use of flow
rates in either actual or standard conditions to calculate emissions.
The proposed additions, at proposed 40 CFR 98.236(d)(2)(i)(D) and (E)
and (d)(2)(ii)(I), (J), (L), and (M), specify that reported temperature
and pressure should be the actual temperature and pressure if the flow
rate is reported in actual conditions, or standard temperature and
pressure if the flow rate is reported in standard conditions. These
proposed additions would provide the EPA with the ability to verify the
emissions calculations more
[[Page 50319]]
efficiently and would provide a more consistent data set overall.
G. Dehydrator Vents
Dehydrators are used to remove water from produced natural gas
prior to transferring the natural gas into a pipeline or to a gas
processing facility. Subpart W requires reporting of GHG emissions from
dehydrator vents at onshore petroleum and natural gas production,
onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting, and natural
gas processing facilities. Emissions are determined using one of the
calculation methodologies for glycol dehydrators provided in existing
40 CFR 98.233(e) based on the unit's annual average daily natural gas
throughput. For glycol dehydrator units with an annual average daily
natural gas throughput less than 0.4 MMscf per day, reporters currently
use population emission factors and equation W-5 to calculate
volumetric CO2 and CH4 emissions per existing 40
CFR 98.233(e)(2) (Calculation Method 2). For glycol dehydrator units
with an annual average daily natural gas throughput greater than or
equal to 0.4 MMscf per day, reporters must follow the provisions under
existing 40 CFR 98.233(e)(1), which require modeling GHG emissions
using a software program (e.g., AspenTech HYSYS[supreg] \74\ or GRI-
GLYCalcTM \75\) (Calculation Method 1). Facilities with
desiccant dehydrators calculate volumetric CO2 and
CH4 emissions using equation W-6 and the provisions of
existing 40 CFR 98.233(e)(3) (Calculation Method 3). In the 2022
Proposed Rule, the EPA proposed to remove the emissions calculation and
reporting requirements for desiccant dehydrators per 40 CFR
98.233(e)(3) and 40 CFR 98.236(e)(3). However, to avoid potential gaps
in emissions data and improve the accuracy of the data collected in the
GHGRP (consistent with section II.A of this preamble), the EPA is not
proposing the removal of desiccant dehydrator requirements in this
proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\74\ AspenTech HYSYS[supreg] software available from AspenTech
website (https://www.aspentech.com/).
\75\ GRI-GLYCalcTM software available from Gas
Technology Institute website (https://sales.gastechnology.org/).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Selection of Appropriate Calculation Methodologies for Glycol
Dehydrators
As noted in section III.G of this preamble, for dehydrators that
have an annual average of daily natural gas throughput that is less
than 0.4 MMscf per day, reporters currently use population emission
factors and equation W-5 to calculate volumetric CO2 and
CH4 emissions per Calculation Method 2 (40 CFR 98.233(e)(2))
and report emissions per 40 CFR 98.236(e)(2). Reporters with glycol
dehydrators that have an annual average of daily natural gas throughput
that is greater than or equal to 0.4 MMscf per day are currently
required to model their dehydrator emissions per Calculation Method 1
(40 CFR 98.233(e)(1)). Through requests submitted to the GHGRP Help
Desk and correspondence with the EPA via e-GGRT, reporters have
indicated the desire to use Calculation Method 1 for determining
emissions from dehydrators that have a throughput that is less than 0.4
MMscf per day, as they stated that the population emission factors
provided in 40 CFR 98.233(e)(2) are not always representative of their
dehydrators' actual emissions. Process simulations and models require
unit-specific inputs, so it is reasonable to expect that they would
result in more accurate emissions estimates for dehydrators that have
differing operating characteristics than those used to develop the
Calculation Method 2 emission factors. Therefore, we are proposing to
revise the calculation requirements of 40 CFR 98.233(e) to allow
reporters the ability to use Calculation Method 1 or Calculation Method
2 when determining emissions from dehydrators that have an annual
average of daily natural gas throughput that is less than 0.4 MMscf per
day. We are also proposing to specify that if a facility is required to
or elects to perform emissions modeling of a glycol dehydrator
consistent with the methodology outlined in 40 CFR 98.233(e)(1), they
must use the results of the model for estimating emissions under 40 CFR
98.233(e). It is the EPA's intention with this proposal that if
reporters conduct modeling for environmental compliance or reporting
purposes, including but not limited to compliance with Federal or state
regulations, air permit requirements, annual inventory reporting, or
internal review, they would use those results for reporting under
subpart W. The EPA is also proposing revisions to 40 CFR 98.236(e) to
specify the applicable reporting requirements based on the selected
calculation method rather than the throughput of the dehydrator. This
amendment is expected to improve the quality of the data collected,
consistent with section II.B of this preamble.
2. Controlled Dehydrators
In correspondence with the EPA via e-GGRT, some reporters have
asked the EPA for guidance regarding calculating emissions from
dehydrators that are routed to different control devices throughout the
reporting year (e.g., dehydrators that are routed to vapor recovery and
subsequently vented to atmosphere or routed to a flare when the vapor
recovery device is not operating). Given the proposed amendments to the
calculation methodology and reporting of flare stack emissions
(discussed in section III.N of this preamble), we are proposing to
revise the methodologies for calculating emissions from dehydrator
vents controlled by a vapor recovery system, flare, or regenerator
firebox/fire tubes currently provided in 40 CFR 98.233(e)(5) and (6),
respectively. The new language in proposed 40 CFR 98.233(e)(4) provides
a methodology for calculating emissions vented directly to the
atmosphere during periods of time when emissions are not routed to the
vapor recovery system, flare, or regenerator firebox/fire tubes. For
flared dehydrator emissions, the proposed 40 CFR 98.233(e) provisions
would direct reporters to the proposed methodologies in 40 CFR
98.233(n). As a regenerator firebox/fire tubes does not meet the
definition of a flare per 40 CFR 98.238, we are proposing methodologies
for calculating combusted emissions from a regenerator firebox/fire
tubes in 40 CFR 98.233(e)(5) using the combustion source equations W-
39A, W-39B, and W-40 of 40 CFR 98.233(z)(3). We are also proposing new
reporting requirements for dehydrator units with emissions routed to a
firebox/fire tubes in proposed 40 CFR 98.236(e)(1)(xvi) and (xvii),
(e)(2)(v), and (e)(3)(vii) that are consistent with the reporting
requirements for combustion sources in 40 CFR 98.236(z)(2). By
proposing these amendments, the EPA seeks to enhance the overall
quality of the data collected under the GHGRP, consistent with sections
II.B and II.D of this preamble.
The EPA is also proposing revisions to two terms consistent with
the proposed amendments for reporting for glycol dehydrators with an
annual average daily natural gas throughput greater than or equal to
0.4 MMscf per day. The EPA is proposing to amend the definition of
``dehydrator vent emissions'' in 40 CFR 98.6 to confirm that dehydrator
emissions reporting should include emissions from both the dehydrator
still vent, and if applicable, the dehydrator flash vent. We are also
proposing to remove the term ``reboiler'' from the definition, as the
term ``regenerator'' refers to the same piece of equipment. Finally, we
are proposing to expand the dehydrator control types referenced in the
definition to include regenerator fireboxes/fire tubes and vapor
recovery systems. Additionally,
[[Page 50320]]
the EPA is proposing to amend the definition of ``vapor recovery
system'' in 40 CFR 98.6 to clarify that routing emissions from a
dehydrator regenerator still vent or flash tank separator vent to the
regenerator firebox/fire tubes does not qualify as vapor recovery for
purposes of 40 CFR 98.233. The EPA has noted significant variability in
the dehydrator emissions values reported over the past several years,
with values ranging from extremely high to almost negligible emissions,
which indicates that there are likely inconsistencies in how these
terms are being interpreted among subpart W reporters. In proposing
these edits, the EPA expects to improve the quality of the emissions
data reported and confirm the original intent of these terms.
3. Calculation Method 1 for Glycol Dehydrators
Reporters with glycol dehydrator units that calculate emissions
using Calculation Method 1 are currently required to determine
emissions using any standard simulation software package that uses the
Peng-Robinson equation of state to calculate the equilibrium
coefficient; speciates CH4 and CO2 emissions from
dehydrators; and has provisions to include regenerator control devices,
a separator flash tank, stripping gas and a gas injection pump or gas
assist pump. According to current 40 CFR 98.233(e)(1), the information
that must be used to characterize emissions include natural gas feed
flow rate and water content; outlet natural gas water content;
absorbent circulation pump type, circulation rate, and absorbent type;
use of stripping gas, use of flash tank separator (and disposition of
recovered gas), hours operated, wet natural gas temperature, pressure,
and composition. These parameters currently must be determined for
typical operating conditions over the calendar year by engineering
estimate and process knowledge based on best available data. Consistent
with section II.B of this preamble, we are proposing that the input
parameters related to the natural gas feed that are used for the
simulation software must be obtained by measurement. Those parameters
include feed natural gas flow rate, feed natural gas water content, wet
natural gas temperature and pressure at the absorber inlet, and wet
natural gas composition. We are proposing that reporters would collect
measurements reflective of representative operating conditions over the
time period covered by the simulation. We are not proposing to change
the requirement that the other parameters must be determined for
operating conditions based on engineering estimate and process
knowledge.
We are also proposing that the parameters that must be used to
characterize emissions should reflect operating conditions over the
time period covered by the simulation rather than just over the
calendar year. Under this proposed change, reporters could continue to
run the simulation once per year with parameters that are determined to
be representative of operating conditions over the entire year.
Alternatively, reporters would be allowed to conduct periodic
simulation runs to cover portions of the calendar year, as long as the
entire calendar year is covered. The reporter would then sum the
results at the end of the year to determine annual emissions. In that
case, the parameters for each simulation run would be determined for
the operating conditions over each corresponding portion of the
calendar year. Finally, we are proposing to clarify that the
information reported under 40 CFR 98.236(e)(1) should be provided on an
annual basis, either as an average across the year, or a total for the
year (in the case of operating hours for the unit).
Subpart W currently lists two example software options, AspenTech
HYSYS[supreg] and GRI-GLYCalcTM (GLYCalc), that meet the
software requirements in 40 CFR 98.233(e)(1). Reporters are not limited
to only using these two example software options. However, the EPA
recently approved the use of ProMax \76\ software simulations for
compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart HH, National Emission Standards
for Hazardous Air Pollutants from Oil and Gas Production Facilities
(hereafter referred to as ``NESHAP HH'').\77\ In the approval letter,
the EPA concluded that the ProMax model results are typically
equivalent or more conservative when compared to the results from the
GLYCalc model and the total capture condensation method used by the EPA
in its research. After considering this issue, we expect that ProMax
meets the specifications of existing 40 CFR 98.233(e)(1) and,
therefore, we are proposing to add ProMax as an example software
program for calculating dehydrator emissions in 40 CFR 98.233(e)(1) for
clarity for reporters. Consistent with the EPA's approval of ProMax for
NESHAP HH compliance, the EPA is proposing that if reporters elect to
use ProMax, they would be required to use version 5.0 or above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\76\ BRE Promax[supreg] software available from BRE website
(https://www.bre.com/).
\77\ Letter from Steffan Johnson, Group Leader, Measurement
Technology Group, U.S. EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, to Josh Ravichandran, Bryan Research & Engineering, LLC,
Re: Response to request for broad source category-wide approval for
use of Bryan Research & Engineering's process simulation software,
ProMax[supreg] (ProMax) in lieu of the GRI-GLYCalcTM
software (GLYCalc) for modeling glycol dehydration unit emissions in
demonstrating compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart HH, National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants from Oil and Gas
Production Facilities (Subpart HH). March 31, 2022. Available at
https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2022-03/ravichandran-bre-promax-alt-final_147_signed.pdf and in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As stated above, the EPA indicated in the referenced NESHAP HH
ProMax approval that ProMax emissions results may be more conservative
than emissions calculated using GLYCalc. In order to assess potential
emissions changes between reporting years, the EPA is also proposing
add a new provision under 40 CFR 98.236(e)(1)(xviii) to request
reporting of the modeling software used to calculate emissions for each
dehydrator unit using Calculation Method 1. We expect these proposed
amendments would improve the quality of the data collected, consistent
with section II.B of this preamble.
4. Calculation Method 1 Reporting
The EPA has reviewed the subpart W glycol dehydrator data and
reporting requirements in existing 40 CFR 98.236(e) and has made a
preliminary determination that additional information would help to
more accurately characterize emissions from glycol dehydrators using
Calculation Method 1. The EPA is proposing under 40 CFR 98.236(e) to
require separate reporting of emissions for a modeled glycol
dehydrator's still vent and flash tank vent. These vents often use
different control techniques, so requiring the emissions and applicable
controls from these vents to be reported separately would ensure that
emissions are more accurately characterized. The proposed data elements
are included in the output files from the modeling software used for
glycol dehydrators and therefore, this provision is not expected to be
difficult for reporters to implement. We expect these proposed
amendments would improve the quality of the data collected, consistent
with section II.C of this preamble.\78\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\78\ In the 2022 Proposed Rule, the EPA proposed to add several
new reporting requirements for Calculation Method 1 glycol
dehydrators under 40 CFR 98.236(e)(1) in an effort to find a
potential correlation between dehydrator emissions and operating
parameters. However, after consideration of comments received on the
2022 Proposed Rule, we have decided not to propose these additional
elements in this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 50321]]
In the 2022 Proposed Rule, the EPA proposed to collect additional
information on Calculation Method 1 glycol dehydrators under 40 CFR
98.236(e)(1) in an effort to derive a correlation between vent flow
rate, absorbent circulation rate, and glycol pump type. Comments on the
2022 Proposed Rule indicated that this additional information request
would be unnecessarily burdensome to reporters. Therefore, we are not
proposing the reporting of additional data elements for this purpose in
this proposal.
5. Calculation Method 2 for Glycol Dehydrators
As noted in section III.F.3 of this preamble, for glycol
dehydrators with an annual average daily natural gas throughput less
than 0.4 MMscf per day, reporters currently use population emission
factors and equation W-5 to calculate volumetric CO2 and
CH4 emissions per existing 40 CFR 98.233(e)(2) and report
emissions per existing 40 CFR 98.236(e)(2). Under these current
requirements, the count of glycol dehydrators with annual average daily
natural gas throughput less than 0.4 MMscf per day could include
dehydrators with annual average daily natural gas throughput of 0 MMscf
per day (i.e., glycol dehydrators that were not operated during the
reporting year). As a result, some annual reports include a nonzero
count of dehydrators per existing 40 CFR 98.236(e)(2)(i) without any
corresponding CO2 and CH4 emissions. In these
cases, it is not clear if the reporter did not report emissions because
emissions are not expected, the emissions data were inadvertently
omitted, or the nonzero count represents the total count of all
dehydrators with annual average daily natural gas throughput less than
0.4 MMscf per day, including those that were not in use.
Therefore, the EPA is proposing to clarify in 40 CFR 98.233(e)(2)
that the dehydrators for which emissions are calculated should be those
with annual average daily natural gas throughput greater than 0 MMscf
per day and less than 0.4 MMscf per day (i.e., the count should not
include dehydrators that did not operate during the year). Similarly,
the EPA is proposing to clarify in 40 CFR 98.236(e)(2) introductory
text that the count of dehydrators in existing 40 CFR 98.236(e)(2)(i)
(proposed 40 CFR 98.236(e)(2)(ii)) should also be those with annual
average daily natural gas throughput greater than 0 MMscf per day and
less than 0.4 MMscf per day. These proposed amendments are expected to
improve implementation and verification of reported data, consistent
with section III.C of this preamble.
Additionally, the EPA is proposing edits to the existing reporting
requirements in current 40 CFR 98.236(e)(2). Specifically, we are
proposing to revise the data collected under current 40 CFR
98.236(e)(2)(iii) (proposed 40 CFR 98.236(e)(2)(iv)) to emphasize the
original intent of the rule. Currently, the requirement is to report
whether any Calculation Method 2 dehydrator emissions are routed to a
control device other than a vapor recovery system or a flare or
regenerator firebox/fire tubes (and if so, the type of control
device(s) and count of units routing to each control). We are proposing
to specifically state that the reporting of ``other'' control devices
should only include control devices that reduce CO2 and/or
CH4 emissions. This proposed revision would allow the EPA to
verify the expected reductions in vented CO2 and/or
CH4 emissions due to the use of the control device. This
proposed amendment is expected to improve implementation and
verification of reported data, consistent with section III.C of this
preamble.
6. Desiccant Dehydrators
Subpart W requires reporting of desiccant dehydrators as a
subcategory of dehydrator vents. The data required to be reported for
desiccant dehydrators is consistent with the information that is
reported for Calculation Method 2 for small glycol dehydrators: the
total number of desiccant dehydrator units, whether any emissions from
Calculation Method 3 units were routed to a vapor recovery system,
flare, or other control (and if so, the count of units utilizing each
of those controls), and the vented and/or combusted emissions from
desiccant dehydrators. In June 2022, the EPA proposed to remove the
reporting of desiccant dehydrators; however, as described in section
II.B of this preamble, CAA section 136(h) directs the EPA to ensure
that reporting under subpart W reflects total CH4 emissions,
and we are no longer proposing to remove this source. Instead, to
better implement and verify the desiccant dehydrator data reported
under subpart W (consistent with section II.C of this preamble), the
EPA is proposing several updates to the current desiccant dehydrator
reporting requirements of 40 CFR 98.236(e)(3).
Specifically, we are proposing to remove the cross-references from
40 CFR 98.236(e)(3) to 40 CFR 98.236(e)(2)(i) through (iv) and instead
include all of the applicable reporting requirements from current 40
CFR 98.236(e)(2)(i) through (iv) for Calculation Method 2 glycol
dehydrators as reporting requirements for Calculation Method 3
desiccant dehydrators under 40 CFR 98.236(e)(3). Currently, the
language in 40 CFR 98.236(e)(3)(i) simply states that the same
information that is included under 40 CFR 98.236(e)(2)(i) through (iv)
should be reported for dehydrators that use desiccant. While we
acknowledge that the current language has been correctly interpreted by
reporters as-is, replicating the requirements under 40 CFR 98.236(e)(3)
would make the rule easier to follow and allow the EPA to further
clarify the required reporting data elements for desiccant dehydrators.
Additionally, the EPA is proposing to specify that only desiccant
dehydrators that were opened during the reporting year should be
included in the total number of desiccant dehydrators at the facility
under proposed 40 CFR 98.236(e)(3)(ii). This revision would align the
reported count of desiccant dehydrators with the applicability of
Calculation Method 3 methodology, which requires facilities to
calculate emissions from the amount of gas vented from vessels when
they are depressurized and opened for the desiccant refilling process.
Also, we are proposing to require reporting of the total volume of all
opened desiccant dehydrator vessels and the total number of desiccant
dehydrator openings in the calendar year as new data elements under
proposed 40 CFR 98.236(e)(3)(iii) and (iv), respectively. These data
elements are inputs into equation W-6 and should, therefore, be readily
available to facilities. With the change to reported number of
desiccant dehydrators under proposed 40 CFR 98.233(e)(3)(ii) and the
proposed addition of the two new data elements for vessel volume and
number of vessel openings, the EPA would be able to more effectively
verify the reported desiccant dehydrator emissions from each facility.
The EPA is also proposing to revise the definitions of
``dehydrator'' and ``desiccant'' in 40 CFR 98.6 to conform with the
inclusion of desiccant dehydrators in subpart W. Currently, the
definition of ``dehydrator'' indicates that desiccant is an example of
a liquid absorbent. Since desiccants are solid materials, we are
proposing to remove desiccant from the list of example liquid
absorbents and instead define dehydrators as devices that use either a
liquid absorbent or a desiccant to remove water vapor from a natural
gas stream. The current definition of ``dehydrator'' also indicates
that the device is used to absorb water vapor.
[[Page 50322]]
However, since some desiccants work by adsorbing water, we are
proposing to replace the word ``absorb'' with ``remove.'' The
definition of ``desiccant'' indicates that desiccants ``include
activated alumina, pelletized calcium chloride, lithium chloride and
granular silica gel material.'' We are proposing to add ``molecular
sieves'' to the list of example desiccant because they are a common
type of desiccant. Since the list of example desiccants is not meant to
be exhaustive or all-inclusive, we are also proposing to replace the
word ``including'' with ``including, but not limited to.'' With these
changes, the proposed definition would clarify that desiccants
``include, but are not limited to, molecular sieves, activated alumina,
pelletized calcium chloride, lithium chloride and granular silica gel
material.'' We expect these proposed amendments would improve the
overall quality and completeness of the emissions data collected by the
GHGRP, consistent with section II.A of this preamble.
Consistent with the proposed revisions to the definition of
``desiccant'' under 40 CFR 98.6, the EPA is proposing to add two
additional data elements to the desiccant dehydrator reporting
requirements in 40 CFR 98.236(e)(3). We are proposing to require
reporting of the count of opened desiccant dehydrators that used
deliquescing desiccant (e.g., calcium chloride or lithium chloride) and
the count of opened desiccant dehydrators that used regenerative
desiccant (e.g., molecular sieves, activated alumina, or silica gel)
present at the facility (proposed 40 CFR 98.236(e)(3)(ii)(B) and (C),
respectively). As regenerative desiccant dehydrators are not opened as
often as deliquescing desiccant dehydrators, the EPA would use this new
data to verify large swings in desiccant dehydrator emissions year-to-
year and to gain a better understanding of the distribution of
emissions between the two types of desiccant dehydrators. These
proposed amendments would improve verification of reported data and
ensure accurate reporting of emissions, consistent with section II.C of
this preamble.
H. Liquids Unloading
1. Selection of Calculation Method
Subpart W currently requires reporting of emissions from well
venting for liquids unloading. Facilities currently calculate emissions
using measured flow rates under Calculation Method 1 (40 CFR
98.233(f)(1)) or engineering equations under Calculation Method 2 for
unloadings without plunger lifts (40 CFR 98.233(f)(2)) and Calculation
Method 3 for unloadings with plunger lifts (40 CFR 98.233(f)(3)). As
noted in the preamble to the NSPS OOOOb supplemental proposal,
facilities can face operational and safety issues managing liquids
unloading with the EPA noting in the preamble that there could be
situations where ``it is technically infeasible or not safe to perform
well liquids with zero emissions unloadings'' (87 FR 74781, December 6,
2022). The EPA believes these safety and operational issues can
possibly extend to taking measurements at wells with liquids unloading.
Therefore, the EPA is proposing to continue providing reporters the
option to use Calculation Methods 2 and 3 to calculate emissions from
liquids unloading. Both equations rely on well-specific data, including
well depth, tubing or casing diameter, and the flow line rate of gas,
to calculate well-level emissions. However, consistent with section
II.B of this preamble, the EPA is proposing that reporters with liquids
unloadings must calculate emissions from unloadings for each well at
least once every 3 consecutive calendar years or more frequently using
Calculation Method 1 to ensure that the engineering equations
accurately and consistently represent the quantity of emissions from
unloading events.
To implement this change, the EPA is proposing to amend the
introductory text in 40 CFR 98.233(f) to add the requirement that
reporters must use Calculation Method 1 to calculate emissions from
well venting for liquids unloading every 3 consecutive calendar years
or more frequently. Calculation Method 1 currently requires reporters
to install a recording flow meter on the vent line used to vent gas
from the well to a separator or atmospheric tank and measure the flow
rate of the unloading events. The reporter must measure flow rates at
one or more wells in each sub-basin combination (sub-basin/plunger lift
indicator/automated/manual indicator) where wells are subject to
liquids unloading events. The average measured flow rate in standard
cubic feet per hour is then applied to each well with unloadings in the
same sub-basin combination for the time in hours during the year the
well is unloaded. To support implementation of this requirement, the
EPA is proposing to add 40 CFR 98.236(f)(2)(xi)(D) and
98.236(f)(2)(xii)(D) to require reporters to report the most recent
calendar year Calculation Method 1 was used to calculate emissions from
unloadings for the same sub-basin combination.
2. Reporting for Calculation Methods 2 and 3
Under the current reporting requirements of 40 CFR 98.236(f),
facilities must report whether plunger lifts were used when using
Calculation Method 1 and must report the data elements used in
equations W-7A and W-7B. For Calculation Methods 2 and 3, however,
reporters currently only report a subset of the data elements used to
calculate emissions in equations W-8 and W-9. Specifically, for
Calculation Methods 2 and 3, reporters must provide a plunger lift
indicator (i.e., whether plunger lifts were used), total number of
wells with well venting for liquids unloading, the total number of
unloading events, and the casing diameter (Calculation Method 2) or the
tubing diameter (Calculation Method 3).
In a 2019 study, Zaimes et al.\79\ evaluated various liquid
unloading scenarios, and the results indicated that differentiating
emissions only on the basis of type of unloading (plunger or non-
plunger lift) may not accurately assess emissions from this source. In
particular, Zaimes et al. noted that type of unloading should be
further differentiated for plunger lift unloadings between automated
and manual unloadings, suggesting further granularity is necessary to
properly characterize emissions. In particular, there could be
significant differences in the number and duration of unloadings and,
hence, differences in emissions between manual and automated plunger
lift unloadings and liquids unloading emissions. A manual unloading
occurs when field personnel attend to the well at the well-pad, for
example, to manually plunge a well at the site using a rig or other
method, to open a valve to direct flow to an atmospheric tank to clear
the well, or to manually shut-in the well to allow pressure to build in
the well-bore. Manual unloadings may be performed on a routine schedule
or on ``as needed'' basis. An automated unloading is performed without
manual interference. Examples of an automated unloading include a
timing and/or pressure device used to optimize intermittent shut-in of
the well before liquids choke off gas flow or to open and close valves,
continually operating equipment that does not require presence of an
operator such as rod pumping units, automated and unmanned plunger
lifts, or other
[[Page 50323]]
unloading activities that do not entail a physical presence at the
well-pad.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\79\ Zaimes, G.G. et al. ``Characterizing Regional Methane
Emissions from Natural Gas Liquid Unloading.'' Environ. Sci.
Technol. 2019, 53, 4619-4629. Available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Zaimes et al. study did not evaluate manual and automated non-
plunger lift unloadings separately, but further differentiating non-
plunger lift unloadings between manual and automated unloadings in
subpart W could also improve data quality. Correspondence with
reporters via e-GGRT since subpart W reporting for the onshore
production segment began in 2011 indicates potentially meaningful
differences in the number of unloadings and emissions for manual versus
automated non-plunger lift unloadings. When the EPA finalized the
calculation methods and reporting requirements for well venting for
liquids unloading, the reporting requirements did not differentiate
between manual and automated non-plunger lift unloadings. However,
reporters have clearly affirmed the use of automated non-plunger lift
unloadings in response to multiple inquiries the EPA has made as part
of the annual report verification process.
In addition, there are several data elements used to calculate
emissions from liquids unloading in equations W-8 and W-9 for
Calculation Methods 2 and 3 that are not currently required to be
provided. Specifically, reporters do not report well depth (Calculation
Method 2) or tubing depth (Calculation Method 3), the average flow-line
rate of gas, the hours that wells are left open to the atmosphere
during unloading events, and the shut-in, surface or casing pressure
(Calculation Method 2) or the flow-line pressure (Calculation Method
3). Requiring reporting of these data elements would improve
verification of annual reports to the GHGRP and would allow the EPA and
the public to replicate calculations and more confidently confirm
reported calculated emissions than is currently possible.
The EPA is, therefore, proposing to revise the reporting
requirements in 40 CFR 98.236(f)(1) and (2) to require reporters to
include the following data elements, consistent with section II.C of
this preamble. In 40 CFR 98.236(f)(1), for Calculation Method 1, the
EPA is proposing that reporters would identify the type of unloading as
an automated or manual unloading in addition to identifying whether the
unloading is a plunger lift or non-plunger lift unloading. We are also
proposing in 40 CFR 98.236(f)(1) that reporters would report emissions
by unloading type combination (with or without plunger lifts, automated
or manual unloading). In addition, for each individual Calculation
Method 1 well that was tested during the year, we are proposing that
reporters would specify the type of unloading as automated or manual
unloading under 40 CFR 98.236(f)(1)(xi)(F) or 40 CFR
98.236(f)(1)(xii)(F), as applicable.
For non-plunger lift unloadings that use Calculation Method 2 in 40
CFR 98.233(f)(2), the EPA is proposing in 40 CFR 98.236(f)(2) that
reporters would identify the type of non-plunger lift unloading as
automated or manual non-plunger lift unloading and that reporters would
report emissions and activity data separately for each unloading type
combination. In addition, for each well with non-plunger lift
unloadings, the EPA is proposing to revise and add requirements in
existing 40 CFR 98.236(f)(2)(ix) (proposed 40 CFR 98.236(f)(2)(xi) in
this proposed rule) to report the well depth for each well
(WDp) and the shut-in pressure, casing pressure or surface
pressure for each well, (SPp). Reporters would continue to
report the internal casing diameter (CDp) as is currently
required for non-plunger lift unloadings.
For plunger lift unloadings that use Calculation Method 3 in 40 CFR
98.233(f)(3), the EPA is proposing in 40 CFR 98.236(f)(2) that
reporters would identify the type of plunger lift unloading as
automated or manual plunger lift unloading and that reporters would
report emissions and activity data separately for each unloading type
combination. In addition, for all each well with plunger lift
unloadings, the EPA is proposing to revise and add requirements in
existing 40 CFR 98.236(f)(2)(x) (proposed 40 CFR 98.236(f)(2)(xii) in
this proposed rule) to report the tubing depth (WDp) and the
flow-line pressure for each well in the sub-basin (SPp).
Reporters would continue to report the internal tubing diameter
(TDp) as is currently required for plunger lift unloadings.
Finally, for each well with unloadings that uses Calculation Method
2 or 3, the EPA is proposing to add new requirements, as proposed 40
CFR 98.236(f)(2)(ix) and (x), to report the flow-line rate of gas
(SFRp) and the cumulative number of hours that the well is
left open to the atmosphere during unloading events (HRp,q),
respectively.
To encourage accurate classification of manual and automated
unloadings for all calculation methods, the EPA is proposing to add new
terms in 40 CFR 98.238 for ``Manual liquids unloading'' and ``Automated
liquids unloading.'' The terms are proposed to be defined consistent
with the descriptions provided earlier in this section of this
preamble.
3. Other Clarifying Amendments
The EPA is proposing an additional amendment to add clarity for
reporters with liquids unloadings. The EPA is proposing to specify in
the introductory text for 40 CFR 98.233(f) that calculation of
emissions from unloading events is required only when the well is
unloaded to the atmosphere or to a control device. The EPA is proposing
this change because these unloadings are the events that result in
emissions of GHG to the atmosphere. The proposed change, consistent
with sections II.C and II.D of this preamble, is intended to provide
clarity to reporters while also ensuring that the EPA continues to
receive accurate and relevant data.
I. Gas Well Completions and Workovers With Hydraulic Fracturing
Reporters currently may use equation W-10A or W-10B to calculate
emissions from gas well completions and workovers with hydraulic
fracturing. Equation W-10A is used to calculate emissions from wells
using inputs obtained from a representative sample of wells within a
sub-basin and the ratio of the gas flowback rate to the production flow
rate, and equation W-10B is used to calculate emissions using inputs
obtained from all wells within a sub-basin and the flow rate and flow
volume of the gas vented or flared. In addition, reporters must use
Calculation Method 1 or Calculation Method 2 in existing 40 CFR
98.233(g)(1) for calculating inputs to equations W-12A and W-12B if
using equation W-10A. Calculation Method 1 relies on direct measurement
of gas flow rate during flowback to develop calculation inputs whereas
Calculation Method 2 uses an engineering equation to produce a
calculated flowback. Specifically, Calculation Method 2 uses the
measured gas pressure differential across the well choke to estimate
gas flow rate for natural gas well completions and workovers with
hydraulic fracturing. It is, therefore, often referred to as the
``Choke Flow'' equation. The Choke Flow equation is only available for
hydraulically fractured natural gas well completions and workovers. It
cannot be used for hydraulically fractured oil well completions and
workovers.
The majority of onshore production facilities with hydraulically
fractured completions and workovers use equation W-10B to calculate
emissions. In RY2021, 118 onshore production facilities reported 2418
hydraulically fractured gas well completions or workovers. Only 15 of
those facilities used equation W-10A for emissions calculations for 385
gas well
[[Page 50324]]
completions or workovers. It is unknown what percentage of those
facilities use Calculation Method 2, as the calculation methodology is
not currently reported.
Consistent with section II.B of this preamble, the EPA is proposing
to retain equations W-10A and W-10B, but is proposing to remove the
option in 40 CFR 98.233(g)(1) for reporters to use Calculation Method
2, the Choke Flow equation, when using equation W-10A. The EPA believes
that measurement of back flow rates is standard practice in the onshore
production segment, whether through measurement of every well
completion or workover or through measurement of a representative well
or workover. Moreover, this is supported by the large number of
reporters using equation W-10B compared with equation W-10A. The EPA
believes this proposal would improve reporting of emissions from
hydraulically fractured gas well completions and workovers while
impacting very few reporters due to the small number of reporters using
equation W-10A. The EPA understands that some reporters may be
concerned that there could be situations where direct measurement is
not possible for technical, operational or safety reasons; however,
subpart W provides requirements for use of missing data procedures as
specified in 40 CFR 98.235. The EPA is requesting comment on whether we
should retain Calculation Method 2 for gas well completions and
workovers with hydraulic fracturing. However, if the EPA retains
Calculation Method 2 following consideration of public comment on this
proposed rulemaking, the EPA expects we would also amend the reporting
requirements in the final rulemaking to improve data quality and
transparency. Specifically, if Calculation Method 2 is retained, the
EPA expects we would add a new reporting requirement in 40 CFR
98.236(g) for reporters that use equation W-10A to indicate whether the
backflow rate for the representative well was determined using
Calculation Method 1 or Calculation Method 2.
J. Blowdown Vent Stacks
1. Reporting Equipment Categories for Pipelines
Subpart W currently requires reporting of blowdowns either using
flow meter measurements (40 CFR 98.233(i)(3)) or using unique physical
volume calculations by equipment or event types (40 CFR 98.233(i)(2)).
Stakeholders have indicated through correspondence with the EPA via e-
GGRT and the GHGRP Help Desk that the descriptions of the ``facility
piping'' and ``pipeline venting'' categories in 40 CFR 98.233(i)(2) as
it is currently written reference ``distribution'' pipelines but
compressor stations are generally not associated with distribution
pipelines. Therefore, the EPA is proposing to revise the descriptions
of the facility piping and pipeline venting categories in 40 CFR
98.233(i)(2) to reflect the EPA's intent regarding which equipment or
event type category is appropriate for each blowdown, consistent with
section II.D of this preamble. Our intent is that the ``facility
piping'' equipment category is limited to unique physical volumes of
piping (i.e., piping between isolation valves) that are located
entirely within the facility boundary. In contrast, the intent for the
``pipeline venting'' equipment category is that a portion of the unique
physical volume of pipeline is located outside the facility boundary
and the remainder, including the blowdown vent stack, is located within
the facility boundary. The proposed revisions to the equipment type
descriptions would clarify these distinctions. Additionally, we are
proposing to remove the reference to ``distribution'' pipelines in the
description of these two categories because we did not intend to limit
the pipeline venting category to unique physical volumes that include
such pipelines. We agree with the industry stakeholders who have
indicated that facilities subject to the blowdown vent stack reporting
requirements typically are connected to other pipelines such as
gathering pipelines or transmission pipelines, and on-site blowdowns
from sections of these pipelines should be reported. Finally, we note
that for the ``facility piping'' equipment category and the ``pipeline
venting'' equipment category, the existing phrase ``located within a
facility boundary'' in the descriptions of those categories generally
refers to being part of the facility as defined by the existing
provisions of subpart A or subpart W, as applicable, and we are not
proposing to change that portion of those descriptions. In other words,
blowdowns from unique physical volumes of gathering pipeline that are
entirely considered to be part of the ``facility with respect to
onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting'' as defined
in 40 CFR 98.238 would be assigned to the ``facility piping'' equipment
category. The ``pipeline venting'' equipment category would only apply
if the unique physical volume includes some sections of gathering
pipelines that are not part of the ``facility with respect to onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting'' as defined in 40 CFR
98.238.
2. Blowdown Equipment Types
As noted in section III.J.1 of this preamble, subpart W currently
requires reporting of blowdowns either using flow meter measurements
(40 CFR 98.233(i)(3)) or using unique physical volume calculations by
equipment or event types (40 CFR 98.233(i)(2)). When the Onshore
Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline industry segment was added to subpart
W in 2015, after considering public comments that indicated that the
existing equipment or event types were not appropriate for the new
segment, the EPA developed new equipment or event types that apply only
for the Onshore Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline industry segment (80
FR 64275, October 22, 2015). The new equipment or event types were
added to the introductory paragraph of 40 CFR 98.233(i)(2), where the
existing equipment or event types were already located, resulting in a
complex introductory paragraph. These changes also resulted in
identical third and last sentences in 40 CFR 98.233(i)(2) that
currently read as follows: ``If a blowdown event resulted in emissions
from multiple equipment types and the emissions cannot be apportioned
to the different equipment types, then categorize the blowdown event as
the equipment type that represented the largest portion of the
emissions for the blowdown event.''
The EPA is proposing, consistent with section II.D of this
preamble, to move the listings of event types and the apportioning
provisions to a new 40 CFR 98.233(i)(2)(iv) so that the introductory
paragraph in 40 CFR 98.233(i)(2) would be more concise and provide
clearer information regarding which requirements are applicable for
each blowdown. Proposed 40 CFR 98.233(i)(2)(iv) includes separate
paragraphs for each set of equipment and event type categories and
would also provide clearer information regarding the applicable
requirements for each industry segment.
3. Blowdown Temperature and Pressure
In the 2015 amendments to subpart W (80 FR 64262, October 22,
2015), the EPA added the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting industry segment and the Onshore Natural Gas Transmission
Pipeline industry segment and specified that both industry segments are
required to report emissions from blowdown vents. Stakeholders
representing the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and
Boosting industry segment provided
[[Page 50325]]
comments on the proposed rule stating that the proposed definition of
facility would make equipment geographically dispersed, and blowdowns
may occur without personnel on-site or nearby, which would make it
difficult to collect the information needed to calculate emissions from
each blowdown (80 FR 64271, October 22, 2015). After considering those
comments, the EPA also specified in the final amendments to equation W-
14A that for emergency blowdowns at onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facilities, engineering estimates based on best
available information may be used to determine the actual temperature
and actual pressure.
Since that time, the EPA has received questions through the GHGRP
Help Desk indicating that facilities in the Onshore Natural Gas
Transmission Pipeline industry segment also have unmanned blowdown
vents. Given that a ``facility with respect to the onshore natural gas
transmission pipeline segment'' is the total mileage of natural gas
transmission pipelines owned and operated by an onshore natural gas
transmission pipeline owner or operator, all of the blowdown vents at
that facility would be outside the fenceline of a transmission
compression station and would be geographically dispersed. The EPA
considers it reasonable to assume that those blowdown vents may also be
unmanned during an emergency blowdown, and thus it can similarly be
difficult to collect the information needed to calculate emissions from
each blowdown. Therefore, we are proposing to extend the provisions in
equation W-14A of 40 CFR 98.233(i)(2)(i) that allow use of engineering
estimates based on best available information to determine the
temperature and pressure of an emergency blowdown to the Onshore
Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline segment, which would align the
requirements for the two geographically dispersed industry segments
currently required to report blowdown vent stack emissions (Onshore
Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting) and increase clarity of reporting requirements
for Onshore Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline reporters, consistent
with section II.D of this preamble. As described in section III.C.1 of
this preamble, we are also proposing to allow use of engineering
estimates to determine the temperature and pressure for emergency
blowdowns in equation W-14A for the geographically dispersed industry
segments that we are proposing would begin reporting emissions from
blowdown vent stacks (Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production and
Natural Gas Distribution).
In addition, similar provisions to allow use of engineering
estimates based on best available information to determine the
temperature and pressure of an emergency blowdown were not added to
equation W-14B of 40 CFR 98.233(i)(2)(i) in 2015 (80 FR 64262, October
22, 2015). We have reviewed this equation and have determined that this
omission was inadvertent. Therefore, we are proposing to add provisions
to equation W-14B of 40 CFR 98.233(i)(2)(i) to allow use of engineering
estimates to determine the temperature and pressure of an emergency
blowdown for both the geographically dispersed industry segments that
currently report blowdown vent stack emissions (Onshore Natural Gas
Transmission Pipeline and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting) as well as the geographically dispersed industry segments
that we are proposing would be required to begin reporting blowdown
vent stack emissions as described in section III.C.1 of this preamble
(Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production and Natural Gas
Distribution), consistent with equation W-14A.
K. Atmospheric Storage Tanks
Facilities in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production and
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry
segments are currently required to report CO2 and
CH4 emissions (and N2O emissions when flared)
from atmospheric pressure fixed roof storage tanks receiving
hydrocarbon liquids (hereafter referred to as ``atmospheric storage
tanks'').\80\ Reporters with gas-liquid separators or onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting non-separator equipment (e.g.,
stabilizers, slug catchers) with annual average daily throughput of oil
greater than or equal to 10 barrels per day are required to calculate
annual CH4 and CO2 using Calculation Method 1 or
2 as described in existing 40 CFR 98.233(j)(1) and (2), respectively.
For wells flowing directly to atmospheric storage tanks without passing
through a separator with throughput greater than or equal to 10 barrels
per day, facilities must calculate annual CH4 and
CO2 emissions using Calculation Method 2. For hydrocarbon
liquids flowing to gas-liquid separators or non-separator equipment or
directly to atmospheric storage tanks with throughput less than 10
barrels per day, reporters must currently use Calculation Method 3 as
specified in existing 40 CFR 98.233(j)(3) to calculate annual
CO2 and CH4 emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\80\ As described in section III.C.3 of this preamble, the EPA
is proposing to revise the source type in 40 CFR 98.233(j) from the
current name of ``onshore production and onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting storage tanks'' to ``hydrocarbon
liquids and produced water storage tanks'' to reflect the proposal
to require reporting of storage tank emissions from additional
industry segments as well as to reflect the proposed addition of
reporting for produced water storage tanks. When used to describe
proposed amendments in this section, the general term ``atmospheric
storage tanks'' applies to the group of hydrocarbon liquids and
produced water storage tanks that would be reporting emissions if
these proposed amendments are finalized.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Open Thief Hatches
The purpose of a thief hatch on an atmospheric storage tank is
generally to allow access to the contents of the tank for sampling,
gauging, and determining liquid levels. The thief hatch also works
along with the vent valve to maintain safe tank operating pressures.
The EPA previously evaluated emissions from atmospheric storage tanks
as part of the 2016 amendments to subpart W (81 FR 86500, November 30,
2016) and determined that the subpart W calculation methodology in 40
CFR 98.233(j) already includes emissions from thief hatches or other
openings on atmospheric storage tanks in the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting industry segments. The subpart W calculation methodologies
for controlled atmospheric storage tanks include procedures for
determining emissions from storage tanks with a vapor recovery system
(existing 40 CFR 98.233(j)(4)) and storage tanks with a flare (existing
40 CFR 98.233(j)(5)). The procedure for determining emissions from a
tank with a vapor recovery system instructs reporters to adjust the
storage tank emissions downward by the magnitude of emissions recovered
using a vapor recovery system as determined by engineering estimate
based on best available data (existing 40 CFR 98.233(j)(4)(i)). The
procedure for determining emissions from an atmospheric storage tank
with a flare references 40 CFR 98.233(n), which currently instructs
reporters to use engineering calculations based on process knowledge,
company records, and best available data to determine the flow to the
flare if the flare does not have a continuous flow measurement device.
If a reporter sees emissions from a thief hatch or other opening on a
controlled atmospheric storage tank during an equipment leak survey
[[Page 50326]]
conducted using OGI, the reporter should consider that information as
part of the ``best available data'' used to calculate emissions from
that storage tank.
However, it appears that reporters may not be accurately accounting
for emissions from open thief hatches on atmospheric storage tanks, as
many reporters claim 100 percent capture efficiency from vapor recovery
systems and flares. In order to emphasize the original intent of the
rule and ensure the accuracy of reported data, the EPA is proposing
several clarifying edits to 40 CFR 98.233(j)(4) and (5) (which, as
described in section III.K.3 of this preamble, would be combined in
proposed 40 CFR 98.233(j)(4)), consistent with sections II.B and II.C
of this preamble. We are proposing to specifically state that emissions
during times of reduced capture efficiency are required to be evaluated
to determine if adjustments are needed to the calculated recovered mass
from vapor recovery units or total emissions vented to atmosphere from
tanks. Reduced capture efficiency may occur during periods when the
control device is not operating or is bypassed when the control device
is operating, such as open thief hatches. The emissions that are not
captured by a vapor recovery system or sent to a flare must be
considered when calculating emissions from atmospheric storage tanks
vented directly to the atmosphere using Calculation Methods 1, 2, or 3.
Further, we are proposing to provide a calculation methodology for
determining reduced capture efficiencies when a control device is in
use but a thief hatch is not properly seated or closed. We are
proposing to revise existing 40 CFR 98.233(j) to require facilities to
assume that no emissions are captured by the control device (0 percent
capture efficiency) when the thief hatch on a tank is open or not
properly seated. As described above, emissions during this time would
be reported as vented directly to the atmosphere as determined using
Calculation Methods 1, 2, or 3. Additionally, in order to accurately
quantify the time period that emissions are vented to atmosphere from
an open or not properly seated thief hatch, consistent with section
II.B of this preamble, the EPA is proposing in 40 CFR 98.233(j)(7) to
require either the use of a thief hatch sensor, if present and
operating, or if a thief hatch sensor is not present and operating,
visual inspection of the tank to monitor the thief hatch. We are
proposing that if a thief hatch sensor is present and operating on the
tank, sensor data must be used to inform the periods of time that a
thief hatch is open or not properly seated. The thief hatch sensor must
be capable of transmitting and logging data whenever a thief hatch is
open or not properly seated and when the thief hatch is subsequently
closed. Visual inspections would be required once per calendar year, at
a minimum, if a thief hatch sensor is not present and operating. If the
thief hatch is required to be monitored as a fugitive emissions
component to comply with NSPS OOOOb or the applicable EPA-approved
state plan or the applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62, we are
proposing that visual inspections must be conducted at least as
frequent as the required visual, audible, or olfactory fugitive
emissions components surveys described in NSPS OOOOb or the applicable
EPA-approved state plan or the applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part
62, or annually (whichever is more frequent). Similar to the provisions
of 40 CFR 98.233(q), if one visual inspection is conducted in the
calendar year and an open or not properly seated thief hatch is
identified, the reporter would be required to assume that the thief
hatch had been open for the entire calendar year. If multiple visual
inspections are conducted in the calendar year and an open or not
properly seated thief hatch is identified, the reporter would be
required to assume that the thief hatch had been open since the
preceding visual inspection (or the beginning of the year if the
inspection was the first performed in a calendar year) through the date
of the visual inspection (or the end of the year if the inspection was
the last performed in a calendar year). As discussed in the TSD for the
2016 amendments to subpart W, we determined that this methodology
provides an accurate quantification of emissions and it is consistent
with the timeframe required for subpart W annual reports.\81\ However,
we are requesting comment on expanding the start date of the open thief
hatch prior to the beginning of the reporting year. In this scenario,
if the reporter can identify the start date and it spans reporting
years, then that reporter would have to report the vented tank
emissions from an open thief hatch that occurred in each reporting year
and, if necessary, revise reports for the previous reporting year. The
EPA is also seeking comment on alternative methodologies for
quantifying the time that a thief hatch is left open or not properly
seated in lieu of a required visual inspection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\81\ Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: Technical Support for Leak
Detection Methodology Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations
for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems. November 1, 2016. Docket Id.
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0764-0066; also available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA is also proposing revisions to the atmospheric storage tank
reporting requirements in 40 CFR 98.236(j) with regard to open thief
hatches. Specifically, the EPA is proposing to require reporting of the
number of controlled atmospheric storage tanks with open or not
properly seated thief hatches within the reporting year, as well as the
total volume of gas vented through the open or not properly seated
thief hatches, for all calculation methods. With these new reporting
elements, the EPA seeks to quantify the impact of open thief hatches on
atmospheric storage tanks and enhance the overall quality of the data
collected under the GHGRP, consistent with section II.C of this
preamble.
Stakeholders have voiced concerns through the GHGRP Help Desk
regarding the potential for double counting of tank thief hatch
emissions under 40 CFR 98.236(j), (q) and (r). The EPA has previously
confirmed that there is no potential for double counting thief hatches
in the methodologies provided in 40 CFR 98.233(q) and 40 CFR 98.233(r),
and we have also confirmed that there is no potential for double
counting thief hatches based on the proposed revisions to 40 CFR
98.236(j), (q) and (r). When determining leaks by population count per
40 CFR 98.233(r), the EPA is proposing updated major equipment emission
factors in existing Table W-1A (proposed Table W-1) that were developed
using Rutherford et al. (2021). Population emission factors are
presented by major equipment, which includes tanks--leaks; however, the
major equipment indicating venting emissions (e.g., tanks--
unintentional vents) were not included. For equipment leak surveys per
40 CFR 98.233(q), existing Table W-1E (proposed Table W-2) references
40 CFR 98.232(c)(21) and (j)(10) for onshore petroleum and natural gas
production and onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting, respectively. These provisions, which describe the list of
components to be surveyed for equipment leaks, specifically state that
thief hatches or other openings on a storage vessel should not be
considered an ``other component.'' As such, we confirm that the
proposed thief hatch emissions reporting requirements in 40 CFR
98.236(j) would not overlap with the equipment leak emission reporting
requirements in 40 CFR 98.236(q) and (r). Also, we confirm that the
proposed thief hatch emissions reporting requirements would not overlap
with
[[Page 50327]]
emissions reporting in 40 CFR 98.236(y). As stated in section III.B of
this preamble, only thief hatch emissions that exceed the emissions
estimated under 40 CFR 98.233(j) by 250 mtCO2e or more, or
100 kg/hr of CH4 or more, would be included in the
calculation and reporting requirements for ``other large release
events.''
The EPA is aware that there are circumstances other than open or
not properly seated thief hatches in which the capture efficiency of
the control device(s) for atmospheric storage tanks is reduced. These
circumstances include, but are not limited to, when the control device
is bypassed due to an open pressure relief device or when the
atmospheric storage tank covers and closed vent systems have openings
that allow emissions to vent directly to atmosphere. We are proposing
in 40 CFR 98.233(j)(4)(i)(D) to require facilities to account for time
periods of reduced capture efficiency from causes other than open or
not properly seated thief hatches when determining total emissions
vented directly to atmosphere based on best available data. However, we
are requesting comment on methodologies other than best available data
for identifying and quantifying time periods of reduced capture
efficiency in these situations. For example, the EPA is requesting
comment on the prevalence of pressure monitoring systems on atmospheric
storage tanks, how pressure monitoring systems can be used to identify
and determine the duration of periods of reduced capture efficiency due
to open pressure relief devices, and the cost of those pressure
monitoring systems.
2. Malfunctioning Dump Valves
For Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production and Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting facilities with
atmospheric storage tank emissions calculated using Calculation Method
1 (40 CFR 98.233(j)(1)) or Calculation Method 2 (40 CFR 98.233(j)(2)),
reporters must also follow the procedures in current 40 CFR
98.233(j)(6) (proposed 40 CFR 98.233(j)(5)) and use equation W-16 to
calculate emissions from occurrences of gas-liquid separator dump
valves not closing properly. Equation W-16 estimates the annual
volumetric GHG emissions at standard conditions from each storage tank
resulting from the malfunctioning dump valve on the gas-liquid
separator using a correction factor, the total time the dump valve did
not close properly in the calendar year, and the hourly storage tank
emissions. Per the definition of the variable ``En'' in
equation W-16, the input hourly storage tank emissions should be those
calculated using Calculation Methods 1 or 2 and should be adjusted
downward by the magnitude of emissions recovered using a vapor recovery
system, if applicable. The EPA is proposing to revise the equation
variables (particularly the subscripts) in equation W-16 to clarify the
intent of this equation. We are proposing to revise the variable
``En'' to ``Es,i'' to further clarify that these
are the volumetric atmospheric storage tank emissions determined using
the procedures in 40 CFR 98.233(j)(1), (2), and (4). We are also
proposing to replace the ``n'' and ``o'' subscripts in the other
variables with a ``dv'' subscript to indicate that these are the
emissions from periods when the gas-liquid separator dump valves were
not closed properly and that the emissions from these periods should be
added to the emissions determined using the procedures in 40 CFR
98.233(j)(1), (2), and (4).
One of the inputs to equation W-16 is the total time the dump valve
did not close properly in the calendar year (Tn). Currently,
Tn may be estimated based on maintenance, operations, or
routine separator inspections that indicate the period of time when the
valve was malfunctioning in open or partially open position. In order
to improve the quality of the open dump valve emissions data collected,
consistent with section II.C of this preamble, the EPA is proposing to
formalize the requirement to perform routine visual inspections of
separator dump valves to determine if the valve is stuck in an open
position, thus allowing gas carry-through to the controlled tank(s).
The EPA is proposing to revise the current provisions in 40 CFR
98.233(j)(6) (which is proposed 40 CFR 98.233(j)(5)) to require visual
inspection of the gas-liquid separator and determine if the liquid dump
valve is stuck in an open or partially open position. Incorporating
this proposed monitoring requirement would result in a more realistic
time estimate being used in equation W-16 and thus, more accurate
emissions reporting, consistent with section II.B of this preamble.
Visual inspections would be required once per calendar year, at a
minimum. Similar to the provisions of 40 CFR 98.233(q) and the proposed
section 40 CFR 98.233(j)(7), if one visual inspection is conducted in
the calendar year and a stuck dump valve is identified, the reporter
would be required to assume that the dump valve had been stuck open for
the entire calendar year. If multiple visual inspections are conducted
in the calendar year and a stuck dump valve is identified, the reporter
would be required to assume that the dump valve had been stuck open
since the preceding visual inspection (or the beginning of the year if
the inspection was the first performed in a calendar year) through the
date of the visual inspection (or the end of the year if the inspection
was the last performed in a calendar year). As discussed in the TSD for
the 2016 amendments to subpart W, we determined that this methodology
provides an accurate quantification of emissions and it is consistent
with the timeframe required for subpart W annual reports.\82\ We are
requesting comment on expanding the start date of the open thief hatch
prior to the beginning of the reporting year. In this scenario, if the
reporter can identify the start date and it spans reporting years, then
that reporter would have to report the vented tank emissions from an
open thief hatch that occurred in each reporting year and, if
necessary, revise reports for the previous reporting year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\82\ Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: Technical Support for Leak
Detection Methodology Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations
for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems. November 1, 2016. Docket Id.
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0764-0066; also available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Applicability and Selection of Appropriate Calculation Methodologies
for Atmospheric Storage Tanks
When determining the applicability of the different calculation
methodologies described in existing 40 CFR 98.233(j), reporters must
calculate their annual average daily throughput to determine whether
flow of hydrocarbon liquids through the gas-liquid separator, well, or
non-separator equipment is greater than or equal to 10 barrels per day.
Through the GHGRP Help Desk and correspondence with the EPA via e-GGRT,
it appears that reporters may be misinterpreting how hydrocarbon liquid
throughputs from gas-liquid separators should be determined.
Specifically, reporters appear to have differing conclusions regarding
whether the throughput determination should be based on flow into or
out of the separator and whether days when the separator was not
operating should be included when calculating the annual average.
Therefore, we are proposing revisions to the introductory text of 40
CFR 98.233(j) to emphasize the original intent of how the hydrocarbon
liquid throughputs should be determined. Specifically, we are proposing
to add language that clearly states that the annual average daily
throughput of hydrocarbon liquids should be based on
[[Page 50328]]
flow out of the separator, well, or non-separator equipment determined
over the actual days of operation. This amendment is expected to
clarify the rule, consistent with II.D of this preamble and improve the
quality of the data collected, consistent with section II.C of this
preamble.
For hydrocarbon liquids flowing to gas-liquid separators or non-
separator equipment or directly to atmospheric storage tanks with
throughput greater than 0 barrels per day and less than 10 barrels per
day, reporters currently use population emission factors and equation
W-15 to calculate volumetric CO2 and CH4
emissions per Calculation Method 3 (40 CFR 98.233(j)(3)) and report
emissions per 40 CFR 98.236(j)(2). However, facilities with hydrocarbon
liquids flowing to gas-liquid separators or non-separator equipment or
directly to atmospheric storage tanks with throughput greater than or
equal to 10 barrels per day are given the option to either model their
tanks per Calculation Method 1 (40 CFR 98.233(j)(1)) or use a mass
balance approach per Calculation Method 2 (40 CFR 98.233(j)(2)).
Through the GHGRP Help Desk and correspondence with the EPA via e-GGRT,
reporters have expressed the desire to use Calculation Methods 1 or 2
for reporting emissions from storage tanks currently required to use
Calculation Method 3, as they stated that the population emission
factors provided in 40 CFR 98.233(j)(3) are not always representative
of their tanks' actual emissions. Calculation Methods 1 and 2 require
unit-specific inputs, so it is reasonable to expect that they would
result in more accurate emissions estimates for atmospheric storage
tanks that have differing operating characteristics than those used to
develop the Calculation Method 3 emission factors. Therefore, the EPA
is proposing to amend the requirements in 40 CFR 98.233(j) to specify
reporters may use Calculation Method 1, Calculation Method 2, or
Calculation Method 3 when determining emissions from hydrocarbon
liquids flowing to wells, gas-liquid separators, or non-separator
equipment with throughput greater than 0 barrels per day and less than
10 barrels per day. We are also proposing to specify in 40 CFR
98.233(j) that if a reporter is required or elects to perform emissions
modeling of an atmospheric storage tank consistent with the methodology
outlined in 40 CFR 98.233(j)(1), they must use the results of the model
for estimating emissions under 40 CFR 98.233(j). It is the EPA's
intention with this proposal that if reporters conduct modeling for
environmental compliance or reporting purposes, including but not
limited to compliance with Federal or state regulations, air permit
requirements, annual inventory reporting, or internal review, they
would use those results for reporting under subpart W. Consistent
revisions are also proposed for the reporting requirements in 40 CFR
98.236(j). These amendments are expected to improve the quality of the
data collected and provide flexibility to reporters, consistent with
section II.D of this preamble.
The current requirements in 40 CFR 98.233(j) require calculation of
emissions from atmospheric pressure fixed roof storage tanks. As
discussed in section III.C of this preamble, the EPA evaluated the
sources included in present-day inventories of the oil and gas industry
in comparison with sources covered in subpart W and is proposing to
include additional sources in subpart W as a result of this evaluation.
Based on a similar evaluation, we are proposing to remove the ``fixed
roof'' language when referring to atmospheric pressure storage tanks
subject to 40 CFR 98.233(j). This would expand the reporting of tank
emissions to include floating roof tanks, which are a source included
in the 2022 U.S. GHG Inventory for the petroleum industry. We are also
proposing revisions to existing 40 CFR 98.236(j)(1)(x) and existing 40
CFR 98.236(j)(2)(i) to require separate reporting of the total count of
fixed roof and floating roof tanks at the facility. To provide
additional clarity for this proposed amendment, we are also proposing
to revise all instances of ``storage tanks,'' ``atmospheric tanks,''
and ``tanks'' in 40 CFR 98.233(j) and 40 CFR 98.236(j) to instead use
the term ``atmospheric pressure storage tanks.'' We are proposing to
define an atmospheric pressure storage tank as ``a vessel (excluding
sumps) operating at atmospheric pressure that is designed to contain an
accumulation of crude oil, condensate, intermediate hydrocarbon
liquids, or produced water and that is constructed entirely of non-
earthen materials (e.g., wood, concrete, steel, plastic) that provide
structural support. Atmospheric pressure storage tanks include both
fixed roof tanks and floating roof tanks. Floating roof tanks include
tanks with either an internal floating roof or an external floating
roof.'' We expect these proposed amendments would improve the overall
quality and completeness of the emissions data collected by the GHGRP,
consistent with section II.A of this preamble.
4. Controlled Atmospheric Storage Tanks
In correspondence with the EPA via e-GGRT, some reporters have
asked the EPA for guidance regarding calculating emissions from
atmospheric storage tanks that are routed to different control devices
throughout the reporting year (e.g., tanks that are routed to vapor
recovery and subsequently vented to atmosphere or routed to a flare
when the vapor recovery device is not operating). Given the proposed
amendments to the calculation methodology and reporting of flare stack
emissions (discussed in section III.N of this preamble), we are
proposing to revise the methodologies for calculating emissions from
tanks controlled by a vapor recovery system or a flare currently
provided in 40 CFR 98.233(j)(4) and (5), respectively. The new language
in proposed 40 CFR 98.233(j)(4)(i) provides a methodology for
calculating emissions vented to atmosphere during periods of reduced
capture efficiency of the vapor recovery system or flare (e.g., when a
thief hatch is open or not properly seated). The provisions of proposed
40 CFR 98.233(j)(4)(ii) would require facilities to use engineering
estimates based on best available data to calculate recovered mass from
vapor recovery systems, and also clarifies that reporters must take
into account periods with reduced capture efficiency of the vapor
recovery system (e.g., when a thief hatch is open or not properly
seated or when the vapor recovery system is down for maintenance) when
calculating mass recovered. For flared atmospheric storage tank
emissions, the proposed 40 CFR 98.233(j) provisions would direct
reporters to the proposed methodologies in 40 CFR 98.233(n). By
proposing these amendments, the EPA seeks to enhance the overall
quality of the data collected under the GHGRP, consistent with section
II.D of this preamble.
5. Calculation Methods 1 and 2 for Atmospheric Storage Tanks
Reporters with atmospheric storage tanks that calculate emissions
using Calculation Method 1 are currently required to determine
emissions using any standard simulation software package that uses the
Peng-Robinson equation of state, models flashing emissions, and
speciates CH4 and CO2 emissions from the
atmospheric storage tank. According to current 40 CFR 98.233(j)(1), the
information that must be used to characterize emissions include
separator or non-separator equipment temperature and pressure, sales or
stabilized hydrocarbon liquids API gravity, sales or stabilized
[[Page 50329]]
hydrocarbon liquids production rate, ambient air temperature and
pressure, and separator or non-separator equipment hydrocarbon liquids
composition and Reid vapor pressure. These parameters currently must be
determined for typical operating conditions over the calendar year by
engineering estimate and process knowledge based on best available
data. Consistent with section II.B of this preamble, we are proposing
that the input parameters related to the hydrocarbon liquid stream that
are used for the simulation software must be obtained by
measurement.\83\ Those parameters include separator or non-separator
equipment temperature and pressure, sales or stabilized hydrocarbon
liquids API gravity, sales or stabilized hydrocarbon liquids production
rate, and separator or non-separator equipment hydrocarbon liquids
composition and Reid vapor pressure. We are proposing that reporters
would collect measurements reflective of representative operating
conditions over the time period covered by the simulation. We are not
proposing to change the requirement that the other parameters must be
determined for operating conditions based on engineering estimate and
process knowledge.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\83\ As described in section III.C.3 of this preamble, the EPA
is also proposing to expand the applicability of 40 CFR 98.233(j)(1)
to include produced water tanks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are also proposing that the parameters that must be used to
characterize emissions should reflect operating conditions over the
time period covered by the simulation rather than just over the
calendar year. Under this proposed change, reporters could continue to
run the simulation once per year with parameters that are determined to
be representative of operating conditions over the entire year.
Alternatively, reporters would be allowed to conduct periodic
simulation runs to cover portions of the calendar year, as long as the
entire calendar year is covered. The reporter would then sum the
results at the end of the year to determine annual emissions. In that
case, the parameters for each simulation run would be determined for
the operating conditions over each corresponding portion of the
calendar year.
For reporters with atmospheric storage tanks that calculate
emissions using Calculation Method 2, all CH4 and
CO2 in solution are assumed to be emitted from hydrocarbon
liquids. For flow to storage tanks after passing through a separator,
the CH4 and CO2 in solution is determined by
taking a sample of separator hydrocarbon liquids at separator pressure
and temperature. However, for flow to atmospheric storage tanks direct
from wells and flow to atmospheric storage tanks direct from non-
separator equipment, facilities may only use either the latest
compositional analysis already available at the facility or default
liquid and gas compositions from modeling software programs to
determine the CH4 and CO2 in solution; there is
currently no requirement to take a representative sample during the
calendar year. Consistent with these proposed amendments for
atmospheric tanks with emissions calculated using Calculation Method 1,
the EPA is proposing that the composition of the liquids flowing to all
tanks with emissions calculated using Calculation Method 2 must be
obtained by measurement, regardless of the source from which the
liquids are supplied. We are proposing to remove the provisions of 40
CFR 98.233(j)(2)(ii) and (iii) that allowed for representative
compositions to be used for tanks receiving liquids directly from wells
or non-separator equipment. These amendments are expected to improve
the accuracy of the data collected under the GHGRP, consistent with
section II.B of this preamble.
Similar to the provision for dehydrators in 40 CFR 98.233(e)(1),
subpart W currently provides two example software options, AspenTech
HYSYS[supreg] or API 4697 E&P Tank, that meet the software requirements
in 40 CFR 98.233(j)(1). Under the existing requirements, reporters are
not limited using to these two software options when complying with 40
CFR 98.233(j)(1). However, many reporters have been using BRE's ProMax
software to model their tank emissions. In RY2021, based on responses
to 40 CFR 98.236(j)(1)(ii) (name of the software package used if using
Calculation Method 1), 59 percent of facilities reporting emissions
from Calculation Method 1 atmospheric storage tanks used ProMax as
their modeling software, compared to 30 percent using API 4697 E&P Tank
and 6 percent using AspenTech HYSYS[supreg]. Given the significant
majority of reporters using ProMax, and considering our proposed
addition and supporting rationale of ProMax to the list of example
software options in 40 CFR 98.233(e)(1), we are proposing to add ProMax
as an example software program for calculating atmospheric tank
emissions per 40 CFR 98.233(j)(1). Consistent with the EPA's proposed
revisions to 40 CFR 98.233(e)(1), the EPA is proposing to require
ProMax version 5.0 or above. We expect these proposed amendments would
improve the quality of the data collected, consistent with section II.C
of this preamble.
Additionally, we are aware that several process simulation software
options have the ability to model emissions from atmospheric storage
tanks that are receiving hydrocarbon liquids directly from wells. As
such, the EPA is proposing to amend 40 CFR 98.233(j) such that
facilities with wells flowing directly to atmospheric storage tanks
without passing through a separator may use either Calculation Method
1, Calculation Method 2, or, for wells, gas-liquid separators, or non-
separator equipment with annual average daily throughput less than 10
barrels per day, Calculation Method 3. We are also proposing conforming
edits within 40 CFR 98.233(j)(1) and (2) and 40 CFR 98.236(j)(1) to
refer to parameters and requirements for wells flowing directly to
atmospheric storage tanks. These proposed amendments are expected to
improve the accuracy of reported emissions, consistent with section
II.B of this preamble.
Stakeholders have indicated through correspondence with the EPA via
e-GGRT and the GHGRP Help Desk that flash emissions from atmospheric
storage tanks are often determined through laboratory measurement of
separator liquid gas to oil ratio (GOR). This emission calculation
methodology involves taking a pressurized sample of crude or condensate
from an upstream vessel (separator or non-separator equipment) and
flashing the sample in a laboratory. To do this, part of the sample is
brought to sampling temperature and pressure conditions, while another
portion of the sample is brought to storage tank temperature and
pressure conditions. The amount of gas released per volume of oil
generated is measured to estimate the GOR. The chemical composition of
the flash gas is then analyzed and the CH4 and
CO2 concentrations are determined. The GHG emissions can be
estimated by multiplying the GOR by the crude oil or condensate
throughput, and then applying the CH4 and/or CO2
composition to the total gas rate to estimate the CH4 and/or
CO2 emissions from the atmospheric storage tank. The EPA has
determined that this methodology does not meet the requirements of
Calculation Method 1 (as the emissions are not calculated using a
modeling software) or Calculation Method 2 (as the emissions are not
calculated assuming that all the CH4 and CO2 in
solution at separator temperature and pressure is emitted).
[[Page 50330]]
However, upon review of storage tank emissions calculation guidance
from states such as Louisiana \84\ and Texas,\85\ it appears that
companies may be performing this testing to meet state-level
requirements. Additionally, this methodology is included in the 2021
API Compendium as an option for determining atmospheric storage tank
emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\84\ Louisiana Department Of Environmental Quality. ``Flash Gas
Calculation Methods.'' https://www.deq.louisiana.gov/page/flash-gas-calculation-methods.
\85\ Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Air Permits
Division. May 2012. Calculating Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Flash Emissions from Crude Oil and Condensate Tanks at Oil and Gas
Production Sites. Air Permit Reference Guide APDG 5942. Available at
https://www.tceq.texas.gov/assets/public/permitting/air/Guidance/NewSourceReview/guidance_flashemission.pdf and in the docket for
this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, we are seeking comment on adding laboratory measurement
of the GOR from a pressurized liquid sample as a new emission
calculation methodology for atmospheric storage tanks under 40 CFR
98.233(j). If this methodology were to be added to 40 CFR 98.233(j), we
anticipate providing an equation that would multiply the measured GOR
by the annual throughput of the hydrocarbon liquid stream to the
atmospheric storage tank (in barrels per year) to obtain the annual
volumetric flash gas emissions. The CO2 and CH4
emissions from the atmospheric storage tank would then be calculated
using CO2 and CH4 flash gas concentrations
determined from the laboratory analysis. Facilities utilizing this
methodology would report all data elements required under 40 CFR
98.236(j)(1), consistent with the reporting for Calculation Methods 1
and 2. We would also require additional data elements associated
specifically with this new calculation method, such as the annual
average GOR and total days of operation of the atmospheric storage
tank(s) at the facility, well-pad, or gathering and boosting site. We
specifically request comment on the accuracy of this methodology for
calculating GHG emissions (with emphasis on comparison with Calculation
Method 1 modeling), as well as how extensive its use may be in the oil
and gas industry.
6. Calculation Methods 1 and 2 Reporting
For facilities reporting atmospheric storage tank emissions
calculated using Calculation Method 1 or Calculation Method 2, 40 CFR
98.236(j)(1) currently requires reporting of counts of the total number
of atmospheric storage tanks within the sub-basin or county (40 CFR
98.236(j)(1)(x)), the number of atmospheric storage tanks that are
controlled by a vapor recovery system (40 CFR 98.236(j)(1)(xii)(A)),
the number of atmospheric storage tanks that are controlled by a flare
(40 CFR 98.236(j)(1)(xiv)(A)), and the number of atmospheric storage
tanks that are not controlled by either a vapor recovery system or a
flare (40 CFR 98.236(j)(1)(xiii)(A)).\86\ Given the proposed amendments
to require reporting of CO2, CH4, and
N2O emissions from atmospheric storage tanks controlled by a
flare under 40 CFR 98.236(n) (discussed in section III.N of this
preamble), the EPA is proposing to reorganize the reporting
requirements in 40 CFR 98.236(j)(1) to collect each of these tank
counts under 40 CFR 98.236(j)(1)(x)(A) through (F).\87\ The EPA is also
proposing to move the reporting of CO2 and CH4
vented emissions and recovered mass to paragraph 40 CFR
98.236(j)(1)(xi) through (xiv). With this reorganization of the
emissions reporting requirements for atmospheric storage tanks, the EPA
expects to improve verification of atmospheric storage tank emissions,
consistent with section II.C of this preamble.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\86\ In the 2022 Proposed Rule, the EPA proposed updates to the
tank count reporting requirements in current 40 CFR 98.236(j)(1).
These revisions are not included in this proposal, as the current
tank count reporting requirements better align with the proposed
flare stack revisions discussed in section III.N of this preamble.
\87\ 87 As discussed in section III.K.3 of this preamble, the
EPA is expanding this source to include both fixed roof and floating
roof atmospheric storage tanks. The total count of tanks within the
facility is proposed to be further divided into the count of fixed
roof atmospheric storage tanks and the count of floating roof
atmospheric storage tanks. Also, as discussed in section III.K.1 of
this preamble, the EPA is also proposing to collect the count of
controlled atmospheric storage tanks with open or not properly
seated thief hatches.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, the EPA is proposing to remove the requirement to
report an estimate of the number of atmospheric storage tanks that are
not on well-pads and that are receiving the facility's oil (existing 40
CFR 98.236(j)(1)(xi)), consistent with section II.C of this preamble.
This reporting requirement is currently, and under the proposed rule
would still be, redundant because all Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production facilities reporting atmospheric storage tank emissions
calculated using Calculation Method 1 or Calculation Method 2 must also
report the total number of atmospheric storage tanks in the sub-basin
per existing 40 CFR 98.236(j)(1)(x) (proposed to be revised to the
total number of atmospheric storage tanks at the well-pad).
Under 40 CFR 98.236(j)(1)(vii) and (viii), reporters with
atmospheric storage tank emissions calculated using Calculation Method
1 or Calculation Method 2 are currently required to provide the minimum
and maximum concentrations (mole fractions) of CO2 and
CH4 in the tank flash gas. Reporting of emissions and
activity data for atmospheric storage tanks is aggregated at the sub-
basin or county level under the current regulations, and the minimum
and maximum flash gas concentrations were expected to provide the EPA
with a broad characterization of the often-significant number of tanks
reported for each sub-basin or county. However, through correspondence
with reporters via e-GGRT, the EPA has found that the minimum and
maximum flash gas concentrations do not accurately represent the
majority of atmospheric storage tanks within the reported sub-basins
and counties. Thus, the EPA is proposing to revise these two reporting
requirements to request the flow-weighted average concentration (mole
fraction) of CO2 and CH4 in the flash gas, rather
than the minimum and maximum values. These values would be calculated
as the sum of all products of the concentration of CO2 or
CH4 in the flash gas for each storage tank times the total
quantity of flash gas for that storage tank, divided by the sum of all
flash gas emissions from storage tanks. The concentration of
CO2 or CH4 in the flash gas and the throughput
for each storage tank would be determined using the methodologies in
Calculation Method 1 or Calculation Method 2. Consistent with section
II.C of this preamble, the EPA expects that these revisions would
improve both the representative nature of the data collected and the
process of verifying annual reported atmospheric storage tanks
emissions data under the GHGRP.
7. Calculation Method 3 for Atmospheric Storage Tanks
For hydrocarbon liquids flowing to storage tanks from gas-liquid
separators or non-separator equipment or directly to atmospheric
storage tanks with throughput less than 10 barrels per day, reporters
currently use population emission factors and equation W-15 to
calculate volumetric CO2 and CH4 emissions per 40
CFR 98.233(j)(3) and report emissions per 40 CFR 98.236(j)(2). Under
these current requirements, the count of separators, wells, or non-
separator equipment with annual average daily throughput less than 10
barrels per day could include separators, wells, or non-separator
[[Page 50331]]
equipment with annual average daily hydrocarbon liquids throughput of 0
barrels (i.e., separators, wells, or non-separator equipment that were
not operated during the reporting year). As a result, some annual
reports include a nonzero count of wells with and without separators
per existing 40 CFR 98.236(j)(2)(i)(E) and (F) (which, as described in
section III.K.7 of this preamble, would be combined in proposed 40 CFR
98.236(j)(2)(ii)(E) and are proposed to be revised to the total number
of separators, wells, or non-separator equipment to better match
``Count'' from equation W-15) without any corresponding CO2
and CH4 emissions. In these cases, it is not clear if the
reporter did not report emissions because emissions are not expected,
the emissions data were inadvertently omitted, or the nonzero count of
all wells and separators includes those that had no throughput.
Therefore, the EPA is proposing to clarify in 40 CFR 98.233(j)(3)
that the separators, wells, or non-separator equipment for which
emissions are calculated should be those with annual average daily
hydrocarbon liquids throughput greater than 0 barrels per day and less
than 10 barrels per day (i.e., the count should not include separators,
wells, or non-separator equipment that had no throughput during the
year). Similarly, we are proposing to clarify that the count of
separators, wells, or non-separator equipment to report under proposed
40 CFR 98.236(j)(2)(ii)(E) should also be those with annual average
daily hydrocarbon liquids throughput greater than 0 barrels per day and
less than 10 barrels per day. These amendments are expected to improve
the quality of the data collected, consistent with section II.C of this
preamble.
8. Calculation Method 3 Reporting
The provisions in existing 40 CFR 98.236(j)(2)(ii) and (iii)
currently require facilities to separately report Calculation Method 3
emissions from atmospheric storage tanks that did not control emissions
with flares and those that controlled emissions with flares,
respectively. As discussed in section III.N of this preamble, the EPA
is proposing new reporting requirements for atmospheric storage tanks
controlled by flares. The proposed revisions would require all flared
emissions from atmospheric storage tanks with emissions calculated
using Calculation Method 3 to be reported under 40 CFR 98.236(n).
Therefore, the EPA is proposing to require reporting of all Calculation
Method 3 emissions that are vented directly to atmosphere under 40 CFR
98.233(j)(2)(ii).\88\ We are proposing to no longer require separate
reporting of Calculation Method 3 emissions from atmospheric storage
tanks that did not control emissions with flares and those that
controlled emissions with flares. This proposed reporting structure
would be similar to the emissions reporting structure for Calculation
Methods 1 and 2 atmospheric storage tanks. Further discussion on the
reasoning behind these proposed revisions is provided in section III.N
of this preamble. In the 2022 Proposed Rule, we proposed to revise the
reporting structure to specify that the reporting requirements in the
current 40 CFR 98.236(j)(2)(iii) only apply to tanks whose emissions
were calculated using Calculation Method 3 that used flares to control
emissions from at least half the annual hydrocarbon liquids received.
As this proposed amendment would not be consistent with the revisions
to the flare stack reporting requirements discussed in section III.N of
this preamble, the EPA is not including these revisions in this
proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\88\ As described in section III.C.3 of this preamble, the EPA
is proposing new reporting requirements in 40 CFR 98.233(j)(2)(iii)
for produced water tanks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For hydrocarbon liquids flowing to gas-liquid separators or non-
separator equipment or directly to atmospheric storage tanks with
throughput less than 10 barrels per day, reporters currently follow the
Calculation Method 3 methodology specified in 40 CFR 98.233(j)(3) and
equation W-15 (proposed equation W-15A). Equation W-15 uses population
emission factors and the count of applicable separators, wells, or non-
separator equipment to determine the annual total volumetric GHG
emissions at standard conditions. The associated reporting requirements
in 40 CFR 98.236(j)(2)(i)(E) through (F) require reporters to delineate
the count used in equation W-15 into the number of wells with gas-
liquid separators in the basin and those without gas-liquid separators.
After reviewing these reporting requirements, the EPA has made a
preliminary determination that they are not consistent with the
language used in the definition of the ``Count'' variable in equation
W-15, nor are they inclusive of all equipment to be included in the
count. Therefore, the EPA is proposing to revise existing 40 CFR
98.236(j)(2)(i)(E) and (F), in combined proposed 40 CFR
98.236(j)(2)(ii)(E), to completely align the reporting requirement with
the total ``Count'' input variable in equation W-15. We are also
proposing to collect this information at the well-pad, gathering and
boosting site, or facility level. The EPA proposes to amend the
language in proposed 40 CFR 98.236(j)(2)(ii)(E) to request the total
number of separators, wells, or non-separator equipment used to
calculate Calculation Method 3 storage tank emissions. The current
language in existing 40 CFR 98.236(j)(2)(i)(E) requests the number of
wells with gas-liquid separators in the basin, which is only a subset
of the equipment included in the ``Count'' variable. Further, the EPA
is proposing to remove the reporting requirement in existing 40 CFR
98.236(j)(2)(i)(F) that requires reporting of the number of wells
without gas-liquid separators in the basin. These changes would ensure
the consistency of the requirements for all facilities reporting
atmospheric storage tanks emissions using Calculation Method 3 and
provide activity data that better correlates with the calculated
Calculation Method 3 atmospheric tank emissions. Consistent with
section II.C of this preamble, reporters would no longer be required to
determine two separate counts that may not align with the inputs used
in equation W-15.
L. Flared Transmission Storage Tank Vent Emissions
Reporters in the transmission compression industry segment
currently are required to report flared emissions specific to their
transmission storage tanks under 40 CFR 98.236(k), separately from
other flare stack emissions. In the years RY2015 through RY2020,
between one and six facilities per year reported having a transmission
tank vent stack routed to a flare, and each of these facilities
reported no dump valve leakage from the tanks that were routed to
flares. As a result, the reported flared emissions from transmission
storage tank vent stacks in each of the last 6 years have been 0 mt of
CO2, CH4, and N2O. Based on these
results, the EPA has made a preliminary determination that including
flared emissions from transmission storage tank vents in the group of
``other flared sources'' instead of continuing to report source-
specific flared emissions from transmission tanks would not affect data
quality or accuracy, nor would it significantly impact the EPA's
knowledge of the industry sector, emissions or trends. Therefore,
consistent with section II.C of this preamble, the EPA is proposing
that transmission storage tanks (proposed to be renamed ``condensate
storage tanks'' as described in section III.C.1 of this preamble) be
classified as an ``other'' flared source such that any flared emissions
from the tanks in the future would be reported only as part of the
[[Page 50332]]
total emissions from the flare. The proposed disaggregation of total
flare emissions to individual source types as described in section
III.N of this preamble would not apply to condensate storage tanks.
To implement this change for condensate storage tanks that are
connected to a flare, the EPA is proposing to remove the current
requirements in 40 CFR 98.233(k)(5) that require reporters to monitor
the tank vent stack annually for leaks and to quantify the leak rate if
a leak is detected. Reporting requirements would remain essentially the
same except that flared mass emissions would no longer be reported
under 40 CFR 98.236(k)(3). Note that if we decide not to finalize the
proposed changes described in this section after considering public
comment, then we alternatively propose that we would finalize
provisions applying the proposed flare emissions disaggregation
requirements as described in section III.N of this preamble to flared
emissions from condensate storage tank vent stacks, consistent with the
proposed disaggregation of emissions for other source types. Under this
alternative, condensate storage tanks would be added to the list of
source types in proposed 40 CFR 98.233(n)(10) for which disaggregation
would be required. We would also not finalize the proposal to remove
the current requirements in 40 CFR 98.233(k)(5) to monitor and quantify
leak rates because it would not be possible to tell how much of the
total flare emissions should be disaggregated to condensate storage
tanks if the scrubber dump valve leakage is not monitored. We request
comment on the advantages and disadvantages of both approaches we are
considering relative to the current requirements.
M. Associated Gas Venting and Flaring
1. Associated Gas Venting
Associated gas venting or flaring is the venting or flaring of
natural gas that originates at wellheads that also produce hydrocarbon
liquids and occurs either in a discrete gaseous phase at the wellhead
or is released from the liquid hydrocarbon phase by separation. Venting
associated gas involves directly releasing associated gas into the
atmosphere at the well-pad or tank battery. Flaring associated gas is a
common, and usually preferred, alternative to venting for safety and
environmental reasons. Subpart W currently requires reporters to
calculate annual emissions from associated gas venting and flaring
using equation W-18, which uses the GOR, volume of oil produced, and
volume of associated gas sent to sales to calculate the volume of gas
vented. Associated gas venting emissions are then calculated using the
results of equation W-18 and the gas composition determined using 40
CFR 98.233(u), and associated gas flaring emissions are calculated by
applying the calculation method of flare stacks in 40 CFR 98.233(n) to
the associated natural gas volume and gas composition determined for
the associated gas stream routed to the flare.
For associated gas venting emissions, we are proposing provisions
in 40 CFR 98.233(m)(3) to specify that if the reporter measures the
flow to a vent using a continuous flow measurement device the reporter
must use the measured flow volumes to calculate the volume of gas
vented rather than using equation W-18. This proposed amendment would
add calculation methodologies based on measurements and improve the
accuracy of the data collected, consistent with section II.B of this
preamble. We are proposing corresponding reporting requirements for
associated gas venting emissions in 40 CFR 98.236(m)(7), including
requiring an indication of whether a continuous flow monitor or
continuous composition analyzer was used. We are also proposing to
require reporting of the flow-weighted mole fractions of CH4
and CO2 and the total volume of associated gas vented from
the well, in standard cubic feet for all wells whether using GOR or
continuous flow measurement devices. Finally, we are proposing to
specify that if the volumetric emissions from associated gas venting
and flaring were determined using a continuous flow measurement device
rather than equation W-18, then reporting of the inputs to equation W-
18, including the GOR, the volume of oil produced, and the volume of
gas sent to sales for wells with associated gas venting or flaring,
would not be required for that well. We request comment on whether we
should continue to require reporting of these data elements even if
they are not used as inputs to an emissions calculation. 40 CFR
98.236(m)(7)(i) currently requires the reporter to provide the total
number of wells and a list of well IDs in the sub-basin for wells that
vented associated gas emissions. As noted in section III.D of this
preamble, however, the EPA is proposing that reporters begin reporting
information for this emission source by well rather than at the sub-
basin level. Therefore, we are proposing to remove this reporting
requirement. The well ID would be reported for each vented well under
proposed 40 CFR 98.236(m)(1) and the total number of wells reported at
the sub-basin level is no longer necessary, because we are proposing to
require reporting at the well level for associated gas venting rather
than the sub-basin level.
As discussed further in section III.N of this preamble, the EPA is
proposing several amendments to the calculation and reporting
requirements for flare stacks that would impact associated gas flaring
emissions calculations in existing 40 CFR 98.233(m)(5) and reporting in
existing 40 CFR 98.236(m)(8). As a result, the EPA is proposing to
remove existing 40 CFR 98.233(m)(5) and instead direct reporters to 40
CFR 98.233(n) to calculate emissions from associated gas flaring. The
EPA is also proposing to remove 40 CFR 98.236(m)(8), as flared
emissions would be reported under 40 CFR 98.236(n). In addition to
flared emissions, 40 CFR 98.236(m)(8)(i) currently requires the
reporter to provide a list of well IDs in the sub-basin for wells that
flared associated gas emissions. As noted in section III.D of this
preamble, however, the EPA is proposing that reporters begin reporting
information for this emission source by well rather than at the sub-
basin level. Existing 40 CFR 98.236(m)(3) requires reporters to
indicate whether any associated gas was flared. The EPA is not
proposing to revise this requirement. Thus, reporters would still be
required to indicate whether associated gas was flared but would report
this information at the well level rather than the sub-basin level
under the proposed rule. Retaining the requirement to provide a list of
well IDs as required by current 40 CFR 98.236(m)(8)(i) would
effectively duplicate the proposed requirement to indicate if
associated gas is flared in 40 CFR 98.236(m)(3) for each well.
Therefore, the EPA is proposing to remove existing 40 CFR
98.236(m)(8)(i) in addition to all other requirements in 40 CFR
98.236(m)(8).
2. Oil and Gas Volumes
As noted previously in this section, subpart W currently requires
reporters to calculate annual emissions from associated gas venting and
flaring using equation W-18. Two of the inputs in the equation are the
volume of oil produced and volume of associated gas sent to sales for
each well in the sub-basin during time periods in which associated gas
was vented or flared. However, based on the values initially reported
in some annual GHGRP reports and correspondence with reporters via e-
GGRT, it appears that reporters, in a
[[Page 50333]]
limited number of cases, may have incorrectly interpreted the language
of equation W-18 to require reporting of gas sent to sales summed
across all sub-basins at the facility during time periods in which
associated gas was vented or flared under existing 40 CFR 98.236(m)(6)
rather than gas sent to sales in the sub-basin during these flaring and
venting periods. Thus, the total sales volume reported for the
associated gas source in these instances is the same as the total
volume of gas sent to sales for the facility reported under existing 40
CFR 98.236(aa)(1)(i)(B). If these reporters are accurately reporting
the volume of gas sent to sales during flaring and venting associated
gas events and using that volume in equation W-18, then the associated
gas venting and flaring emissions are likely overstated, as it is
unlikely that all wells are venting or flaring associated gas 100
percent of the time. If the reporters are using accurate volumes of gas
sent to sales during time periods in which associated gas was vented or
flared for their emissions calculations but reporting total gas sent to
sales, then the activity data reported do not match the emissions,
leading to an inconsistent data set. Therefore, the EPA is proposing to
add the word ``only'' to the definitions of the terms Vp,q
and SGp,q in equation W-18 (40 CFR 98.233(m)(3)) and to the
reporting requirements for those data elements in 40 CFR 98.236(m)(5)
and (6).These proposed amendments would lead to improved accuracy of
reported emissions, consistent with sections II.C and II.D of this
preamble.
The EPA is further proposing to clarify the definition of the
variable SGp,q in equation W-18 to account for associated gas used at
the facility. Currently, the term is defined as ``Volume of associated
gas sent to sales, for well p in sub-basin q, in standard cubic feet of
gas in the calendar year during time periods in which associated gas
was vented or flared.'' That volume is subtracted from the total volume
of associated gas produced to provide a net volume of gas sent to a
vent or flare at each well. However, an operator may use the produced
gas at the well-pad, further reducing the volume of gas sent to sales.
For example, produced gas is often used as fuel for internal combustion
engines or for separators. For this reason, the EPA is proposing to
amend the definition of SGp,q in equation W-18 to include
these additional uses. Specifically, we propose to revise the variable
name to SGp (i.e., we propose to remove the ``q'' subscript)
to indicate that the emissions would no longer be summed and reported
by sub-basin (as described in more detail in section III.D of this
proposal). We propose to define SGp as the volume of
associated gas sent to sales or volume of associated gas used for other
purposes at the facility site, including powering engines, separators,
safety systems and/or combustion equipment and not flared or vented,
for well p, in standard cubic feet of gas in the calendar year only
during time periods in which associated gas was vented or flared.
Incorporating these proposed changes would add clarity to equation W-
18, consistent with section II.D of this preamble, resulting in more
accurate reporting of actual volumes of associated gas sent to a vent
or flare and thus more accurate emissions reporting, consistent with
section II.C of this preamble. Consistent with these changes, the EPA
is also proposing to amend reporting requirements in 40 CFR
98.236(m)(6) to clarify that SGp,q includes associated gas
that is used on-site at the facility but not sent to a flare or vent.
N. Flare Stack Emissions
Flare stacks are an emission source type subject to emissions
reporting by facilities in seven of the ten industry segments in the
Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems source category.\89\ Total
CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions from each
flare currently are required to be calculated using the methodology
specified in 40 CFR 98.233(n). In addition to calculating total
emissions from a flare, reporters currently must also separately
calculate the flared emissions from several types of emission sources
as specified in the requirements of 40 CFR 98.233 specific to that
source type.\90\ The procedures in the source-specific paragraphs of
the existing rule cross-reference the calculation procedures in
existing 40 CFR 98.233(n), but they also specify that the volume and
composition of the gas routed to the flare are required to be
determined according to the procedures for estimating vented emissions
from the specific source type. For example, existing 40 CFR
98.233(e)(6) specifies that the volume and gas composition to use in
calculating flared emissions from dehydrators must be determined
according to the procedures for calculating vented emissions from
dehydrators as specified in existing 40 CFR 98.233(e)(1) through (5).
Since source-specific flared emissions often are a portion of the total
emissions from a flare, existing 40 CFR 98.233(n)(9) specifies that the
total CO2, CH4, and N2O for a
particular flare must be adjusted downward by the amount of the source-
specific emissions that are calculated for the same flare; this ensures
that emissions from a flare are not double counted (i.e., reported for
both the flare stacks source type and another emission source type).
The resulting CO2, CH4, and N2O
emissions to report for that flare according to existing 40 CFR
98.236(n)(9) through (11) should be only what is left after subtracting
all of the source-specific flared emissions from the total emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\89\ Flare stacks are an emission source type currently subject
to emissions reporting by facilities in the following industry
segments: Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production, Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting, Onshore Natural
Gas Processing, Onshore Natural Gas Transmission Compression,
Underground Natural Gas Storage, LNG Import and Export Equipment,
and LNG Storage.
\90\ Facilities currently separately calculate the flared
emissions from the following types of emission sources (if required
for the applicable industry segment, per 40 CFR 98.232): dehydrator
vents (40 CFR 98.233(e)(6)), well venting during completions and
workovers with hydraulic fracturing (40 CFR 98.233(g)(4)), gas well
venting during completions and workovers without hydraulic
fracturing (40 CFR 98.233(h)(2)), onshore production and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting storage tanks (40
CFR 98.233(j)(5)), transmission storage tanks (40 CFR 98.233(k)(5)),
well testing venting and flaring (40 CFR 98.233(l)(6)), and
associated gas venting and flaring (40 CFR 98.233(m)(5)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
When a flare is dedicated to one or more source types that are all
subject to source-specific flared emissions reporting, all of the mass
emissions are currently reported under those source types, and zero
mass emissions are reported for the flare stacks source types. However,
even when the only streams routed to a flare are from source types that
are subject to flared emissions reporting under those source types, the
flare name or ID and all activity data related to the streams that are
routed to the flare and the flare operating characteristics still must
be reported under existing 40 CFR 98.236(n). These activity data
include the volume of gas routed to the flare, average CO2
and CH4 mole fractions in the flared gas, flare combustion
efficiency, fraction of flared gas routed to the flare when it was
unlit, and indicators of whether a continuous flow measurement device
and a continuous gas analyzer were used on the gas stream routed to the
flare. These flare ID and activity data reporting requirements are
specified in existing 40 CFR 98.236(n)(1) through (8). In the rare
cases that a CEMS is used on the outlet of a flare, then according to
existing 40 CFR 98.236(n)(12), only the flare ID and the measured
CO2 emissions must be reported.
The EPA is proposing changes to the flared emissions calculation
[[Page 50334]]
methodologies, including the monitoring provisions, as well as the
flare data reporting requirements for both the flared emissions from
each source type and for each flare. The proposed changes would align
the flared emissions calculation methodology and reporting with the
requirements in CAA section 136(h) to report emissions that are based
on empirical data and that accurately reflect the total CH4
emissions from each facility, consistent with section II.B of this
proposal. We are also proposing changes to clarify specific provisions.
1. Calculation Methodology for Total Emissions from a Flare
The EPA is proposing several revisions to the flare emission
calculation methods to improve the quality and accuracy of the
calculated and reported data, consistent with section II.B of this
proposal. First, we are proposing to revise the default combustion
efficiency for flares. Currently, reporters may assume a default
combustion efficiency of 98 percent, as provided in existing 40 CFR
98.233(n)(3). However, researchers conducting remote sensing tests of
emissions from flares have reported finding lower combustion
efficiencies. For example, Plant et al. conducted extensive testing in
the Eagle Ford, Bakken, and Permian basins and found average combustion
efficiencies ranging from less than 92 percent in the Bakken basin to
slightly more than 97 percent in the Permian basin.\91\ Consistent with
the requirements of CAA section 136(h), we are proposing a tiered
approach to setting the default combustion efficiency that would
provide higher defaults when supported by data from the reporter
implementing certain flare monitoring procedures, in proposed 40 CFR
98.233(n)(4). Specifically, under Tier 1, a default combustion
efficiency of 98 percent would be allowed where the reporter conducts
flare monitoring consistent with the procedures specified in 40 CFR
63.670 and 40 CFR 63.671 of the National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants From Petroleum Refineries (40 CFR part 63,
subpart CC) (hereafter referred to as ``NESHAP CC''). The standard in
NESHAP CC is to either reduce emissions by 98 percent or comply with
the specified flare requirements, as verified via monitoring.
Therefore, under NESHAP CC, it is presumed that complying with the
flare requirements achieve at least a 98 percent reduction in
emissions. Under Tier 2, a default combustion efficiency of 95 percent
would be allowed if the reporter is required to or elects to comply
with the monitoring specified in proposed 40 CFR 60.5417b(d)(1)(viii)
of NSPS OOOOb. The standard in NSPS OOOOb is 95 percent, and it is
presumed that this standard is met when the specified monitoring is
conducted and the corresponding activity data limits are met. The
default combustion efficiency under Tier 3, which would apply if
neither Tier 1 nor Tier 2 requirements are met, would be 92 percent.
This value is based on the low end of the range of empirical results
observed in testing over an extensive area in three of the most active
basins in the United States (U.S.) in Plant et al. Our assessment is
that this would be a reasonable combustion efficiency for subpart W
sources that are not monitoring as specified under Tier 1 or Tier 2
because the overall average in the empirical results likely included
many facilities that would comply with those tiers and thus should be
excluded from the calculation of the average for Tier 3 flares. We are
proposing Tier 3 to provide a default combustion efficiency that would
apply before the flare owner or operator has implemented the monitoring
that would be required to comply with either the final NSPS OOOOb or an
approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62 and
that would be consistent with CAA section 136(h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\91\ Plant, G., et al. 2022. ``Inefficient and unlit natural gas
flares both emit large quantities of methane.'' Science, 377 (6614).
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abq0385. Available in the docket for
this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We request comment on our proposed approach and values, including
whether available data would support the selection of other default
values for any of the tiers. In addition, we request comment on whether
Tier 3 should be included in the final provisions and if so, whether
the data support using a default combustion efficiency of 92 percent or
another value. If commenters do not agree that Tier 3 is appropriate,
we request that the commenters include what alternative approach should
be specified for reporters to use for calculating the combustion
efficiency that would be consistent with the requirements in CAA
section 136(h) to accurately reflect total CH4 emissions and to base
reporting on empirical data. Under an approach where only Tier 1 and
Tier 2 were included, we expect that some period of time would be
needed for flares not subject to NSPS OOOOb to implement the
requirements, potentially the same period of time until the facility is
subject to an approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR
part 62. We request comment on this possible time frame and what
procedures and combustion efficiency should be implemented in the
interim.
Second, for all flares, regardless of the tier discussed above, we
are proposing to require at least continuous parameter monitoring to
determine gas flow to the flare. Currently, under 40 CFR 98.233(n)(1),
if a continuous flow measurement device is used on part or all of the
gas routed to the flare, then the measured values must be used in the
calculation of emissions from the flare. For the portion of gas not
measured by a continuous flow measurement device, the reporter
currently may estimate the flow using engineering calculations based on
process knowledge, company records, and best available data. We are
proposing a more defined empirical method for determining the gas flow
to the flare, consistent with section II.B of this proposal.
Specifically, the proposed revisions to 40 CFR 98.233(n)(1) specify
that the flow rate determination must be based on direct measurement
using a flow meter if one is present, or if a flow meter is not
available, it must be based on indirect calculation of flow using
continuous parameter monitoring, such as line pressure, burner nozzle
dimensions, and appropriate engineering calculations. We are also
proposing that the monitoring could be conducted on either the inlet
gas to the flare or on each of the individual streams that are combined
for routing to the flare.
Third, for all flares, regardless of the tier discussed previously
in this section, we are proposing in 40 CFR 98.233(n)(2) to require
either continuous monitoring (proposed 40 CFR 98.233(n)(2)(i)) or
visual inspection at least once per month (proposed 40 CFR
98.233(n)(2)(ii)) for the presence of pilot flame or combustion flame.
During periods when a continuous monitoring device is out of service,
we are proposing that visual inspections be conducted at least once per
week for the first four weeks of the outage or until a new or repaired
continuous monitoring device is operational. If the outage is less than
one week, then we are proposing that at least one visual inspection
must be conducted during the time the continuous monitoring device is
out of service. If an outage lasts more than four weeks, then we are
proposing that the reporter may switch to conducting visual inspections
at least once per month in accordance with proposed 40 CFR
98.233(n)(2)(ii). Data from these measurements or inspections, combined
with continuous flow data as described previously in this section,
would be used to determine the
[[Page 50335]]
amount of gas routed to the flare when it was unlit. Currently, subpart
W specifies that the fraction of gas sent to an unlit flare is to be
determined by engineering estimate and process knowledge based on best
available data and operating records (as provided in the definition of
the variable ZU for existing equations W-19 and W-20 of 40
CFR 98.233). Researchers conducting remote sensing testing of flares
have identified higher percentages of unlit flares than the average
fractions of gas routed to unlit flares reported under subpart W.\92\
Although the percentage of flares that are unlit may not equal the
fraction of gas routed to unlit flares, the difference suggests there
is a potential for the reported fractions of gas routed to unlit flares
to be underestimated. Therefore, we are proposing a more defined
empirical method of determining the fraction of gas sent to the flare
when it is unlit, consistent with section II.B of this proposal. The
proposed requirement for continuous monitoring or periodic visual
inspection of the pilot flame or combustion flame would provide flare-
specific information on the specific times when the flare was unlit.
The proposed continuous determination of the flow of gas to the flare,
as described earlier in this section, would provide an accurate
determination of the flow during the periods when the flare is unlit.
Together, the information from both measurements would be used to
calculate the total amount of gas routed to the flare when it is unlit.
Dividing this amount by the total annual flow would give the fraction
sent to the flare when it was unlit, which would be used in equations
W-19 and W-20 to calculate the total annual CH4 and
CO2 emissions, respectively, from the flare. If a flame is
not present during a visual inspection, then the reporter must assume
it was unlit since the previous inspection that confirmed the presence
of a flame and that it remains unlit until the next inspection that
confirms the presence of a flame. These assumptions are consistent with
the existing requirements for estimating the time over which a leak
occurs based on equipment leak inspections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\92\ See, e.g., Plant, G., et al. 2022. ``Inefficient and unlit
natural gas flares both emit large quantities of methane.'' Science,
377 (6614). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abq0385. Available in
the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fourth, we are proposing changes to the determination of gas
composition to make the results more accurate, consistent with section
II.B of this proposal. Currently, under 40 CFR 98.233(n)(2), if a
reporter is using a continuous gas composition analyzer on gas to the
flare, then the measured data must be used in the calculation of
emissions from the flare. However, if the reporter does not use a
continuous gas composition analyzer, we have reassessed the current
subpart W requirements that apply and think that they should be revised
to improve clarity and thus better correspondingly result in calculated
emissions that accurately reflect CH4 emissions at the
facility. Specifically, existing 40 CFR 98.233(n)(2) requires
determination of ``the appropriate gas compositions for each stream of
hydrocarbons going to the flare . . .'' However, 40 CFR 98.233(u)(2)(i)
for onshore petroleum and natural gas production facilities and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting facilities requires
the reporter to use an annual average gas composition based on the most
recent available analysis of the facility. Although not explicitly
stated, one interpretation is that the ``most recent available
analysis'' should be for each stream of hydrocarbons routed to the
flare. Another interpretation of 40 CFR 98.233(u)(2)(i) is that the
composition of produced gas may be used for all streams routed to the
flare. This interpretation is based on the first sentence in existing
40 CFR 98.233(u)(2)(i) that states: ``If you have a continuous gas
composition analyzer for produced natural gas, you must use an annual
average of these values for determining the mole fraction.'' Given the
ambiguity in the existing regulations, to date the EPA has not sent
validation messages to have all facilities report using only one of the
possible interpretations. Another concern with the current procedures
for determining gas composition when not using a continuous gas
composition analyzer is that there is no requirement to conduct
additional sampling and analysis over time, and subpart W does not
specify how compositions from multiple streams are to be weighted to
generate the constituent mole fractions of the total combined stream
into the flare that are to be used in equations W-19 and W-20. The
current requirements for determining gas compositions for flared
streams in other industry segments are clearer. However, one of the
options for transmission compression, underground natural gas storage,
LNG storage, LNG import/export facilities, and transmission pipeline
industry segments is to use a default CH4 composition of 95
percent, which may not accurately represent the composition of the gas
flow routed to flares for some facilities. The proposed revisions to
the flare stacks methodology would delete the cross-reference to 40 CFR
98.233(u)(2) and specify the gas composition determination requirements
within proposed 40 CFR 98.233(n)(3). The proposed options are to use a
continuous gas composition analyzer or to take samples for
compositional analysis at least once each quarter in which the flare
operated. If a continuous gas analyzer is used, then the measured data
would be required to be used to calculate flared emissions. Reporters
would be allowed to determine the composition of either the inlet gas
to the flare or on each of the streams that are routed to the flare. If
periodic samples are collected, then the measured concentrations would
be combined with flow data over the same time periods to calculate
flow-weighted annual average concentrations.
Fifth, for clarity, we are proposing to add requirements in
existing 40 CFR 98.233(n)(5) to specify how flow and composition data
would be used to calculate total emissions depending on different
scenarios a reporter could use to determine the flow and gas
composition. Proposed 40 CFR 98.233(n)(5)(i) specifies that if both
flow and gas composition are determined for the inlet gas to the flare,
then the inlet gas data would be used in a single application of
equations W-19 and W-20 to calculate the total emissions from the
flare. If the flow and gas composition are determined for each of the
streams that are routed to the flare, then one proposed option in
proposed 40 CFR 98.233(n)(5)(iii) would require the reporter to use
each set of stream-specific flow and annual average concentration data
in equations W-19 and W-20 to calculate stream-specific flared
emissions for each stream, and then sum the results from each stream-
specific calculation to calculate the total emissions from the flare.
Alternatively, in such circumstances proposed 40 CFR 98.233(n)(5)(iii)
would also allow reporters to sum the flows from each source to
calculate the total gas flow into the flare and use the source-specific
flows and source-specific annual average concentrations to determine
flow-weighted annual average concentrations of CO2 and
hydrocarbon constituents in the combined gas stream into the flare. The
calculated total gas flow and the calculated flow-weighted annual
average concentrations would then be used in a single application of
both equation W-19 and W-20 to calculate the total emissions from the
flare. If flow is determined for all of the individual source streams
while gas composition is determined for the
[[Page 50336]]
combined stream into the flare, then proposed 40 CFR 98.233(n)(5)(ii)
would require the reporter to sum the individual source flows to
calculate the total flow into the flare. This summed volume and the gas
composition determined for the stream into the flare would be used in a
single application of equations W-19 and W-20 to calculate the total
emissions from the flare. Finally, in 40 CFR 98.233(n)(5)(iv) we are
proposing that a reporter may not calculate flared emissions based on
the determination of the total volume at the inlet to the flare and gas
composition for each of the individual streams routed to the flare. The
proposal would not allow this combination of volume and gas composition
determinations because there is no way to calculate flow-weighted
average compositions of either the inlet gas to the flare or the
individual source streams.
Sixth, we are proposing to delete the option to use a default
higher heating value (HHV) in the calculation of N2O
emissions and instead require all reporters to use either a flare-
specific HHV or individual flared gas stream-specific HHVs in the
calculation. Currently, 40 CFR 98.233(n)(7) requires the use of
equation W-40 to calculate N2O emissions from flares. This
equation requires the flared gas volume, the HHV of the flared gas, and
the use of a default emission factor. For field gas or process vent
gas, the variable definition for the HHV provides that either a site-
specific or default value may be used; for other gas streams, a site-
specific HHV must be used. We are proposing in 40 CFR 98.233(n)(8) to
require the use of a flare-specific HHV when composition of the inlet
gas to the flare is measured or when flow-weighted concentrations of
the inlet gas are calculated from measured flow and composition of each
of the streams routed to the flare. Similarly, we are proposing that
reporters would calculate N2O emissions using flared gas
stream-specific HHVs when flow and composition are determined for each
of the individual streams that are routed to the flare and emissions
are calculated per stream and summed to calculate total emissions from
the flare. We are proposing this change because we believe flare-
specific values more accurately represent the HHV of variable flared
gas composition and would result in more accurate calculation of
N2O emissions. Our assessment is that the methods for
calculating CO2 and CH4 in 40 CFR 98.233(n)
already require the use of flare-specific concentrations for the
hydrocarbon constituents in the flared gas streams; therefore, we
expect that a flare-specific HHV is known (or can be calculated using
the compositional data) without incurring additional burden, while
increasing the accuracy of the emissions estimate. We are also
proposing to add a requirement in 40 CFR 98.236(n)(9) to report the
HHV(s) used to calculate N2O emissions. This data element
would improve verification of reported N2O emissions and
minimize the amount of communication with reporters via e-GGRT. It also
would be useful for characterizing the differences in flared gas
streams among the various industry segments and basins, and it is
expected to be useful in analyses such as updates to the U.S. GHG
Inventory.
Seventh, we are proposing changes to the emission calculation
requirements for flares that use CEMS in order to address requirements
in CAA section 136(h) as described in section II.B of this preamble.
Currently, if a reporter operates and maintains a CEMS to monitor
emissions from a flare, existing 40 CFR 98.233(n)(8) requires the
reporter to calculate only CO2 emissions from the flare.
This proposal would revise existing 40 CFR 98.233(n)(8) (proposed 40
CFR 98.233(n)(9)) to require reporters to comply with all of the other
emission calculation procedures in proposed 40 CFR 98.233(n), with one
exception. The exception is that since CO2 emissions would
be measured with the CEMS, calculation of CO2 emissions
using equation W-20 would not be required. We expect that these
proposed amendments would address a potential gap in CH4
emissions reporting and improve the overall quality and completeness of
the emissions data collected by the GHGRP, consistent with section II.A
of this preamble.
Eighth, we are proposing to replace the current source-specific
methodologies for calculating flared emissions (e.g., existing 40 CFR
98.233(e)(6) for dehydrators or existing 40 CFR 98.233(g)(4) for
completions) with a requirement (proposed 40 CFR 98.233(n)(10)) that
the reporter use engineering calculations and best available data to
disaggregate the calculated total emissions per flare to the source
types that routed gas to the flare. One issue with the current source-
specific flared emission calculation methodologies is that the equation
inputs developed under these methodologies (e.g., flared volumes and
compositions) often differ from the inputs used in the methodology to
calculate the total emissions from the flare (as specified in existing
40 CFR 98.233(n)). As a result, when using the existing methodologies,
the sum of the flared emissions calculated for individual source types
sometimes exceeds the total emissions calculated using the methodology
for calculating total emissions from the flare. The proposed change
would eliminate this issue because only the flare methodology would be
used to calculate emissions from a flare, and only these values would
be included in the published data set for the reporting year. Since
estimates of the flared emissions from source types that route
emissions to flares are still useful in other analyses (e.g., assessing
impacts of emission control regulations on nationwide emission trends),
the proposed methodology also would require reporters to estimate the
portions of the total emissions from each flare that are attributable
to each type of source that is currently subject to flared emissions
reporting (e.g., completions, storage tanks, associated gas). The
expected accuracy of the estimated quantities per source type may
sometimes be lower than the expected accuracy of the total emissions
from the flare since the source-specific estimates would be based on
best available data, which may be of more variable quality. However,
the expectation is that the sum of the estimated emissions over all
source types will always equal the calculated (and reported) total
emissions from the flare, and it is expected that the results will be
of sufficient accuracy for their intended purpose.
This proposed change would also address a common misperception
among reporters regarding the flare activity data that is to be
reported under existing 40 CFR 98.236(n). Many reporters have provided
information through the GHGRP Help Desk and in correspondence with the
EPA via e-GGRT indicating that they believe the adjustment requirement
in existing 40 CFR 98.233(n)(9) applies to all flare data, not just the
mass emissions (as intended). Thus, some reporters provide activity
data information for a flare only if some of the mass emissions from
the flare are due to combustion of gas from source types that are not
subject to source-specific flared emissions reporting (i.e.,
miscellaneous flared sources). Although these reporters generally
correctly report the mass emissions from the flare that are due to the
miscellaneous flared sources, they incorrectly limit their activity
data reporting to those same streams. The EPA has procedures in its
verification process to identify such errors; if errors are identified,
the EPA notifies the reporter, who can resolve the issue by correcting
the data and resubmitting
[[Page 50337]]
their annual GHG report. Some reporters have also indicated that they
dislike reporting activity data for a flare in one table in the
reporting form (i.e., Table N.1) and reporting the emissions in a
different table; they suggest that it would be clearer to report all
flare activity data and emissions related to a particular emission
source type together in one location.
We also expect that the total emissions per flare calculated using
the proposed methodology described above would be more accurate than
the emissions calculated using the current source-specific
methodologies. While similar changes to the methods for determining
flow rate and composition of the gas routed to the flare could be
proposed for each of the source-specific methodologies, we have
tentatively determined that the additional accuracy in the source-
specific flared emissions relative to calculation of disaggregated
total emissions based on best available data is not needed given the
additional burden that would be imposed, as the total flared emissions
are expected to be accurate; in other words, applying source-level
methods for flares over the proposed method would not be expected to
have an impact on the accuracy of the total emissions calculated.
However, the proposed approach would still maintain calculation and
reporting of flared emissions per source type because of that
information's importance for use in assessing trends in control over
time and in policy determinations under the CAA, and it would also be
useful in U.S. GHG Inventory development.
Finally, we are proposing to remove existing 40 CFR 98.233(n)(9)
for consistency with the other proposed provisions in this subsection,
as the requirement to correct flare emissions to avoid double counting
would no longer be necessary because the disaggregated emissions would
not be a separate source type.
2. Reporting Requirements for Flared Emissions
The EPA is proposing several changes to the reporting requirements
for flares. These changes are being proposed to align reporting in 40
CFR 98.236(n) with the proposed revisions to the calculation methods
specified in proposed 40 CFR 98.233(n), consistent with section II.B of
this preamble, and to improve the verification process, obtain a better
understanding of the design and operation of flares in each of the
industry segment to help future policy determinations, and clarify
ambiguous provisions.
First, the EPA is proposing to replace the source-specific flared
CH4, CO2, and N2O emissions reporting
requirements currently in 40 CFR 98.236(e), (g), (h), (j), (l), (m),
and (n) with a requirement to report source-specific CH4,
CO2, and N2O emissions that have been
disaggregated from the total flare emissions as described in section
III.N.1 of this preamble. The disaggregated emissions per source type
would be reported per flare under proposed 40 CFR 98.236(n)(19). We are
proposing to remove the source-specific flared CH4,
CO2, and N2O emissions reporting requirements
currently in 40 CFR 98.236(k), but for the reasons discussed in section
III.L of this preamble, we are not proposing to include condensate
storage tanks in this list of source types for which emissions would be
disaggregated in proposed 40 CFR 98.236(n)(19). We are also proposing
to include AGR vents in the list of source types for which emissions
would be disaggregated in proposed 40 CFR 98.236(n)(19), even though
emissions from flaring are not currently reported separately for that
source, due to the proposed addition of reporting of CH4
emissions from that source type, as discussed further in section
III.F.1 of this preamble. In addition to aligning the reporting with
the proposed calculation methodology, reporting the disaggregated
emissions per flare rather than per facility, sub-basin, or county
(under the current provisions of subpart W), and rather than per well-
pad, gathering and boosting site, or facility (as is being proposed for
vented emissions), would provide the EPA and other stakeholders with a
better understanding of the impact of different emission source types
on the performance of flares. We are proposing to retain some of the
unit-specific activity data for source types that are flared as
described throughout this preamble in the sections that describe
amendments specific to those source types (e.g., section III.F.2 of
this preamble for AGR vents, sections III.K.6 and III.K.8 of this
preamble for atmospheric storage tanks, section III.M.1 for associated
gas flaring).
Second, the EPA is proposing to add a requirement for facilities in
the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production industry segment, the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry
segment, and the Onshore Natural Gas Processing industry segment to
report an estimate of the fraction of the gas burned in the flare that
is obtained from other facilities specifically for flaring as opposed
to being generated in on-site operations. A finding from the currently
reported data is that a number of facilities in these industry segments
report significant amounts of emissions from miscellaneous flared
sources. It is not clear what sources are generating the large amount
of gas that is routed to these flares. It is important to know what
source types are generating the large amounts of flared gas because the
same source type may not always be routing the gas to a flare. If the
source type also is not currently subject to source-specific reporting
of vented emissions, then a potentially large quantity of vented
emissions might go unreported. It appears that one potential source of
currently undefined sources of flared emissions is emissions from one
facility that are routed to another facility specifically for flaring.
To help the EPA understand what source types are generating the large
amounts of flared gas, we are proposing in 40 CFR 98.236(n)(10) to
require reporting by facilities in these three industry segments of an
estimate of the fraction of the gas burned in the flare that is
obtained from other facilities specifically for flaring as opposed to
being generated in on-site operations. As an example, if an owner or
operator has an onshore petroleum and natural gas production and an
onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting facility in
the same basin and routes associated gas from wells in the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production facility to a flare that is
defined as part of the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facility, then the flared emissions would be reported by the
onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting facility as
emissions from ``other flare stacks'' sources under the current rule
(or from other flared sources under the proposed amendments). If the
other gas streams routed to the flare are from sources at the onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting facility, then for
this proposed reporting requirement, the onshore petroleum and natural
gas gathering and boosting facility report would include an estimate of
the fraction of the total gas burned in the flare that is associated
gas from the onshore petroleum and natural gas production facility. We
request comment on the types of sources (both onsite sources and
offsite sources) that may be generating these large emissions and
whether other reporting elements could be specified that would better
achieve the EPA's objective of clearly characterizing the sources of
flared emissions from facilities in the three industry segments
identified above. For
[[Page 50338]]
example, we have considered adding a reporting element to identify for
each flare the source type in the category of ``other flared sources''
under this proposal that routes the largest quantity of gas to the
flare. We also request comment on whether there should be a minimum
threshold for the amount of gas routed from a source in the ``other
flared sources'' category before reporting the identity of the source
type would be required and the basis for any such threshold.
Third, we are proposing adjustments to several of the existing
reporting elements to align with proposed changes to the calculation
methodology. For example, existing 40 CFR 98.236(n)(4) requires
reporting of the total volume of gas routed to the flare. As described
in section III.N.1 of this preamble, we are proposing to add an option
for reporters to monitor volume of each stream routed to the flare. To
align with this monitoring approach, we are proposing in 40 CFR
98.236(n)(11) to require reporting of the volumes for each of the
individual streams if the reporter elects to monitor the flow rate of
the individual streams rather than the total. Similarly, existing 40
CFR 98.236(n)(7) and (8) require reporting of the CH4 and
CO2 in the feed gas to the flare. To align with the proposed
option that would allow determination of gas composition at all of the
source stream levels as an alternative to determination of the
composition at the flare inlet, as discussed in section III.N.1 of this
preamble, proposed 40 CFR 98.236(n)(14) and (15) also would require
reporting of the annual CH4 and CO2 mole
fractions for each of the individual streams routed to the flare if the
reporter elects to monitor composition of those streams. Existing 40
CFR 98.236(n)(6) requires reporting of the flare combustion efficiency.
To align with the proposed monitoring tiers, as discussed in section
III.N.1 of this preamble, proposed 40 CFR 98.236(n)(13) would require
reporting of the default combustion efficiency associated with
applicable monitoring tier. In addition, if a reporter switches from
one monitoring tier to another and calculates emissions for part of the
year using the default combustion efficiency for one tier and
calculates emissions for the rest of the year using the default
combustion efficiency for a different tier, then proposed 40 CFR
98.236(n)(13) would require reporting of a flow-weighted average
combustion efficiency for that flare. We are proposing that flow-
weighted average combustion efficiencies be reported to one decimal
place. These data also would help with verification of the reported
emissions.
Existing 40 CFR 98.236(n)(12) requires reporting of whether a CEMS
was used to measure CO2 emissions from the flare. We are
proposing to keep this reporting requirement (in proposed 40 CFR
98.236(n)(20)), but to align with the proposed calculation procedures
when using CEMS, as described in section III.N.1 of this preamble, we
are also proposing to specify that the CO2 mole fraction of
the gas sent to the flare should not be reported when using CEMS
because equation W-20 is not used to calculate CO2 emissions
when using a CEMS.
We are proposing changes to the continuous flow and gas composition
measurement indicator data elements to require reporting of specific
measurement methodologies that were used instead of the current ``yes/
no'' indicators. Currently, existing 40 CFR 98.236(n)(2) requires
reporting of whether the flare stack has a continuous flow measurement
device and existing 40 CFR 98.236(n)(3) requires reporting of whether
the flare stack has a continuous gas analyzer (these are yes/no
indicators). The proposed 40 CFR 989.236(n)(7) would require reporters
to indicate whether flow is determined using a continuous flow
measurement device or whether they use a continuous parameter
monitoring system with engineering calculations. Similarly, the
proposed 40 CFR 98.236(n)(8) would require reporters to indicate
whether gas composition is measured using a continuous gas analyzer or
by taking periodic samples.
We are also proposing to add a reporting element in proposed 40 CFR
98.236(n)(13)(i) for facilities that report flares using a combustion
efficiency of 95 percent to indicate whether the flare is subject to
NSPS OOOOb or a State or Federal plan in part 62 implementing EG OOOOc
or whether the reporter is electing to implement flare monitoring
procedures that are specified in NSPS OOOOb or a State or Federal Plan
in part 62 implementing EG OOOOc. This information would help the EPA
verify the reported data.
Finally, one objective of the current flare reporting requirements
is to obtain information on the total number of flares and their
operating characteristics. We are proposing to require a few new flare-
specific reporting elements to help us better understand the state of
flaring in the industry and to improve data quality, such as an
indication of the type of the flare (e.g., open ground-level flare,
enclosed ground-level flare, open elevated flare, or enclosed elevated
flare) in 40 CFR 98.236(n)(4) and the type of flare assist (e.g.,
unassisted, air-assisted (with indication of single-, dual-, or
variable-speed fan), steam-assisted, or pressure-assisted) in proposed
40 CFR 98.236(n)(5). These data would help the EPA assess the impact of
design and operation on emissions and may be useful in analyses for
potential future policy decisions related to flares under the CAA. To
harmonize the proposed reporting requirements with the proposed
requirement to either continuously monitor or periodically inspect for
the presence of a pilot flame as discussed in section III.N.1 of this
preamble, we are proposing in proposed 40 CFR 98.236(n)(6) that
reporters indicate for each flare whether they continuously monitor for
the presence of a pilot flame, conduct periodic visual inspections, or
both. If periodic visual inspections are conducted, we are proposing to
require reporting of the count of inspections conducted during the year
and an indication of whether the flare has a continuous pilot or auto
igniter. For a pilot flame that is monitored continuously, we are
proposing to require reporting of the number of times the continuous
monitoring device was out of service or otherwise inoperable for a
period of more than one week.
3. Definition of Flare Stack Emissions
In response to a verification message in e-GGRT, one reporter noted
that the existing definition of the term ``flare stack emissions'' in
40 CFR 98.238 does not include CO2 that is in streams routed
to the flare. The term is currently defined to mean ``CO2
and N2O from partial combustion of hydrocarbon gas sent to a
flare plus CH4 emissions resulting from the incomplete
combustion of hydrocarbon gas in flares.'' Based on this definition,
the reporter concluded that CO2 in streams routed to the
flare are not to be reported as flare stack emissions. The current
definition, which was added to the 2010 Final Rule after consideration
of comments on the 2010 re-proposal, does not clearly convey the EPA's
intent that the CO2 that enters a flare should be reported
as flare stack emissions. This intent is evident from the fact that
equation W-20 includes a term for the inlet gas volume times the
CO2 mole fraction in the inlet gas. Additionally, in a
response to a comment on the 2010 re-proposal, the EPA clearly stated
that the total quantity of CO2, including both combusted
CO2 (i.e., CO2 created in the flare) and
uncombusted CO2 (i.e., CO2 that entered and
simply passed through the flare), is to be calculated. Another
[[Page 50339]]
issue with the current definition is that it implies N2O
emissions only result from partial combustion of hydrocarbons in the
gas routed to the flare. This is likely the primary mechanism for
generating N2O emissions when combusting fuels that include
nitrogen-containing compounds. However, natural gas and field gas have
negligible amounts of fuel-bound nitrogen. For combustion of these
fuels, it appears the N2O is generated primarily from
converting thermal nitrogen oxides (NOX) under certain
operating conditions in the flare. Consistent with section II.D of this
preamble, in order to eliminate the unintended inconsistency between
the definition and the intent that CO2 in gas routed to the
flare is to be reported as emissions from the flare, to clarify the
requirement to calculate and report total CO2 that leaves
the flare, and to clarify the source of flared N2O
emissions, we are proposing to revise the definition of the term
``flare stack emissions'' in 40 CFR 98.238 to mean CO2 in
gas routed to a flare, CO2 from partial combustion of
hydrocarbons in gas routed to a flare, CH4 resulting from
the incomplete combustion of hydrocarbons in gas routed to a flare, and
N2O resulting from operation of a flare.
O. Compressors
Compressors are used across the petroleum and natural gas industry
to raise the pressure of and convey natural gas or CO2. The
two main types of compressors used in the industry are centrifugal
compressors and reciprocating compressors. Subpart W currently requires
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production and Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting facilities to calculate compressor
emissions using population emission factors per existing 40 CFR
98.233(o)(10) and (p)(10). Population emission factors are multiplied
by the count of equipment, in this case compressors of a certain type,
to calculate emissions. For the Onshore Natural Gas Processing, Onshore
Natural Gas Transmission Compression, Underground Natural Gas Storage,
LNG Storage, and LNG Import and Export Equipment industry segments,
subpart W requires facilities to annually measure the emissions from
the compressor sources applicable to the mode the compressor is in at
the time of the measurement; facilities also have the option to
continuously measure emissions from a compressor source per existing 40
CFR 98.233(o)(2) through (5) and (p)(2) through (5). The annual
measurements are called ``as found'' measurements because the
compressors are to be measured in the mode in which they are found when
the measurements are made. The ``as found'' measurements are required
for each centrifugal and reciprocating compressor at least annually,
but only for those compressor emission sources that have measurement
requirements for the mode in which they are found (i.e., the defined
``compressor mode-source combinations''), as described in the following
paragraph. If a given compressor was not measured in not-operating-
depressurized-mode during the ``as found'' measurements for three
consecutive years, a measurement in not-operating-depressurized-mode is
currently required to be taken during the next planned scheduled
shutdown of the compressor, per existing 40 CFR 98.233(o)(1)(i)(C) and
(p)(1)(i)(D).
Subpart W at 40 CFR 98.238 currently defines the following
``compressor sources'': wet seal degassing vent (for centrifugal
compressors only); rod packing emissions (for reciprocating compressors
only); blowdown valve leakage through the blowdown vent (for both
centrifugal and reciprocating compressors) and unit isolation valve
leakage through the open blowdown vent without blind flanges (for both
centrifugal and reciprocating compressors). Subpart W also currently
defines the following ``compressor modes'': operating-mode (for both
centrifugal and reciprocating compressors), standby-pressurized-mode
(for reciprocating compressors only \93\), and not-operating-
depressurized-mode (for both centrifugal and reciprocating
compressors). Some compressor sources may only release emissions during
certain compressor modes. Therefore, subpart W uses the term
``compressor mode-source combination'' to refer to the specific
compressor sources that must be measured based on the mode in which the
compressor is found. For centrifugal compressors, subpart W currently
requires measurement in the following compressor mode-source
combinations: wet seal oil degassing vents in operating-mode, blowdown
valve leakage through the blowdown vent in operating-mode, and unit
isolation valve leakage through an open blowdown vent without blind
flanges in not-operating-depressurized-mode. For reciprocating
compressors, subpart W currently requires measurement in the following
compressor mode-source combinations: rod packing emissions in
operating-mode, blowdown valve leakage through the blowdown vent in
operating-mode, blowdown valve leakage through the blowdown vent in
standby-pressurized-mode, and unit isolation valve leakage through an
open blowdown vent without blind flanges in not-operating-
depressurized-mode.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\93\ Currently, subpart W does not require measurements for
centrifugal compressors in standby-pressurized-mode and therefore
does not define this mode for centrifugal compressors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Mode-Source Combination Measurement Requirements
The EPA is proposing several amendments related to the ``as found''
measurement requirements to improve the quality of data collected for
compressors. First, standby-pressurized-mode was not included as a mode
for centrifugal compressors in the existing subpart W definition of
``compressor mode'' and no compressor mode-source combinations were
defined for centrifugal compressors in standby-pressurized-mode. While
centrifugal compressors are seldom in the standby-pressurized-mode,
there have been several occasions when reporters have indicated through
the GHGRP Help Desk that a centrifugal compressor was in this mode
during the ``as found'' measurement. Therefore, we are proposing to
revise the definition of compressor mode in 40 CFR 98.238 to add
standby-pressurized-mode to the defined modes for centrifugal
compressors and require measurement of volumetric emissions from the
wet seal oil degassing vent or dry seal vent, as applicable (see
discussion in following paragraph) and the volumetric emissions from
blowdown valve leakage through the blowdown vent when the compressor is
found in this mode (proposed 40 CFR 98.233(o)(1)(i)(C)), consistent
with section II.A of this preamble.
Second, dry seals on centrifugal compressors were not included in
the existing subpart W definition of ``compressor source'' and no
compressor mode-source combinations were defined for dry seals on
centrifugal compressors. While emissions from wet seal oil degassing
vents are expected to be larger than from dry seals when the dry seal
compressor is well-maintained and operating normally, dry seals still
contribute to centrifugal compressor emissions, especially if they are
poorly maintained or there are unforeseen upset conditions.
Additionally, the measurement crew will already be at the centrifugal
compressor to make the ``as found'' measurement for blowdown valve
leakage, so they can also measure the emissions from the dry seal while
they are onsite. Therefore, to better characterize the emissions from
dry seal centrifugal compressors, we are proposing to revise the
definition of
[[Page 50340]]
compressor source in 40 CFR 98.238 to add dry seal vents to the defined
compressor sources for centrifugal compressors and require measurement
of volumetric emissions from the dry seal vents in both operating-mode
and in standby-pressurized-mode (proposed 40 CFR 98.233(o)(2)(iii)),
consistent with section II.B of this preamble. Proposed measurement
methods for the dry seal vents are similar to those provided for
reciprocating compressor rod packing emissions and would include the
use of temporary or permanent flow meters, calibrated bags, and high
volume samplers. We are proposing that screening methods may also be
used to determine if a quantitative measurement is required. We are
proposing to specify that acoustical screening or measurement methods
would not be applicable to screening dry seal vents because emissions
from dry seal vents are not a result of through-valve leakage. These
proposed revisions include a proposed new reporting requirement in
proposed 40 CFR 98.236(o)(1)(x) to report the number of dry seals on
centrifugal compressors and the reporting of emission measurements made
on the dry seals.
Third, we are proposing to revise 40 CFR 98.233(p)(1)(i) to require
measurement of rod packing emissions for reciprocating compressors when
found in the standby-pressurized-mode because recent studies indicate
that rod packing emissions can occur while the compressor is in this
mode.\94\ The inclusion of this compressor mode-source combination
would more accurately reflect compressor emissions, consistent with
section II.A of this preamble. Furthermore, the measurement crew will
already be at the compressor to make the ``as found'' measurement for
blowdown valve leakage, so they can also measure the emissions from the
dry seal while they are onsite, and several reporters already make
these measurements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\94\ Subramanian, R. et al. ``Methane Emissions from Natural Gas
Compressor Stations in the Transmission and Storage Sector:
Measurements and Comparisons with the EPA Greenhouse Gas Reporting
Program Protocol.'' Environ. Sci. Technol. 49, 3252-3261. 2015.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fourth, as noted in section III.O of this preamble, if a given
compressor was not measured in not-operating-depressurized-mode during
the ``as found'' measurements for three consecutive years, a
measurement in not-operating-depressurized-mode is currently required
to be taken during the next planned scheduled shutdown of the
compressor, per 40 CFR 98.233(o)(1)(i)(C) and (p)(1)(i)(D). This
provision requires reporters to schedule an extra ``as found''
measurement to make this required measurement if the compressor was not
found in this mode when the regularly scheduled ``as found''
measurements were taken. We are proposing to eliminate this requirement
to conduct a measurement in not-operating-depressurized-mode at least
once every three years, consistent with section II.C of this preamble.
We originally included this requirement in subpart W in order to obtain
a sufficient amount of data for this mode (75 FR 74458, November 30,
2010). However, based on data collected under subpart W thus far, many
compressors are in not-operating-depressurized-mode for 30 percent of
the time or more, so facilities would be able to obtain sufficient
number of measurements in not-operating-depressurized-mode to calculate
an accurate mode-source specific emission factor without the additional
requirement. As such, the extra measurements are unnecessary, and we
are proposing to eliminate this requirement and make the annual ``as
found'' measurements true ``as found'' measurements. We are also
proposing to remove the reporting requirement to indicate if the
compressor had a scheduled depressurized shutdown during the reporting
year (existing 40 CFR 98.236(o)(1)(xiv) and 40 CFR 98.236(p)(1)(xiv))
because that information is only collected to verify compliance with
the requirement to conduct a measurement in not-operating-
depressurized-mode at least once every three years.
2. Measurement Methods
The EPA is proposing several amendments related to the measurement
method requirements to improve the quality of data collected for
compressors. First, we are proposing to revise the allowable methods
for measuring wet seal oil degassing vents. Since the inception of
subpart W, the only method provided in 40 CFR 98.233(o)(2)(ii) for
measuring volumetric flow from wet seal oil degassing vents has been
the use of a temporary or permanent flow meter. The limitation in
methods allowed for wet seal oil degassing vents was due to the
expectation that the volumetric flows may exceed the quantitative
limits of these other methods. In reviewing the data reported for the
wet seal oil degassing vent, we found that the measured flow rates
using flow meters are often within the limits of other measurement
methods allowed for other compressor sources. We also found that many
reporters have overlooked the restriction on the methods allowed for
wet seal oil degassing vents and often reported using other measurement
methods (e.g., high volume samplers). We have found that most of these
measured flow rates appear to be within the capacity limits of a
typical high volume sampler. In the small minority of cases in which
flow rates would be outside of the capacity limit of the instrument,
facilities can use an alternate method, consistent with the
requirements for other compressor source measurements. Consequently, we
concluded that the measurement methods allowed for wet seal oil
degassing vents could be expanded to include the use of calibrated bags
and high volume samplers. Therefore, we are proposing to revise 40 CFR
98.233(o)(2)(ii) to allow the use of calibrated bags and high volume
samplers. However, we are not proposing to allow the use of screening
methods because wet seal oil degassing vents are expected to always
have some natural gas flow. Therefore, we are proposing to retain and
clarify this unique limitation on the use of screening methods for wet
seal oil degassing vent measurement methods. This proposed revision
would provide improved clarity of the wet seal oil degassing provisions
and allow an additional measurement method that was determined to be
accurate for this source, consistent with section II.B of this
preamble.
Second, we are proposing to remove acoustic leak detection from the
screening and measurement methods allowed for manifolded groups of
compressor sources. As noted in existing 40 CFR 98.234(a)(5), acoustic
leak detection is applicable only for through-valve leakage. The
acoustic method can be applied to individual compressor sources
associated with through-valve leakage (i.e., blowdown valve leakage or
isolation valve leakage), but it cannot be applied to a vent that
contains a group of manifolded compressor sources downstream from the
individual valves or other sources that may be manifolded together. The
inclusion of this method for manifolded compressor sources was in error
and we are proposing to remove it from 40 CFR 98.233(o)(4)(ii)(D) and
(E) and 40 CFR 98.233(p)(4)(ii)(D) and (E) to improve accuracy of the
measurements, consistent with section II.B of this preamble.
Third, we are proposing a number of clarifications to the
references to the allowed measurement methods to correct errors and
improve the clarity of the rule, consistent with section II.D of
[[Page 50341]]
this preamble. These proposed revisions include: revising 40 CFR
98.233(o)(1)(i)(A) and (B) to reference 40 CFR 98.233(o)(2)(i) instead
of specific subparagraphs of that paragraph that may be construed to
limit the methods allowed for blowdown or isolation valve leakage
measurements; revising 40 CFR 98.233(p)(1)(i)(A), (B) and (C) (as
proposed) to reference 40 CFR 98.233(p)(2)(i) instead of specific
subparagraphs of that paragraph that may be construed to limit the
methods allowed for blowdown or isolation valve leakage measurements;
revising 40 CFR 98.233(p)(1)(i)(A) and (C) (as proposed) to reference
``paragraph (p)(2)(ii) or (iii) of this section as applicable'' instead
of only ``paragraph (p)(2)(ii)'' to clarify that measurement of rod
packing emissions without an open-ended vent line are to be made
according to 40 CFR 98.233(p)(2)(iii); and revising 40 CFR
98.233(p)(2)(ii)(C) and (iii)(A) to clarify that acoustic leak
detection is not an applicable screening method for rod packing
emissions (not a through-valve leakage).
3. Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production or Onshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
As noted in section III.O of this preamble, subpart W requires
onshore petroleum and natural gas production and onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting facilities to calculate compressor
emissions using population emission factors. As noted in the
introduction to section II of this preamble, the EPA recently proposed
NSPS OOOOb and EG OOOOc for certain oil and natural gas sources. The
proposed standards in NSPS OOOOb and the proposed presumptive standards
in EG OOOOc include emission limits for reciprocating compressors,
centrifugal compressors with wet seals, and centrifugal compressors
with dry seals that would apply when the compressor is in operating-
mode or standby-pressurized-mode. The proposed standards would require
owners or operators to conduct volumetric emissions measurements from
each reciprocating compressor rod packing or centrifugal compressor wet
or dry seal on or before 8,760 hours of operation from startup or from
the previous measurement. Similar to the 2016 amendments to subpart W
specific to equipment leak surveys (81 FR 4987, January 29, 2016), the
EPA is proposing to revise the calculation methodology for compressors
at onshore petroleum and natural gas production and onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting facilities in subpart W so that
data derived from centrifugal compressor or reciprocating compressor
monitoring conducted under NSPS OOOOb or the applicable approved state
plan or applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62 could be used to
calculate emissions for subpart W reporting, consistent with section
II.B of this preamble. For compressors at onshore petroleum and natural
gas production or onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities not subject to either NSPS OOOOb or an applicable
approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62, we
are proposing that reporters would have the option to calculate
emissions for subpart W reporting using the same provisions for ``as
found'' measurements as other industry segments.
Because the proposed standards in NSPS OOOOb and the proposed
presumptive standards in EG OOOOc are not the same as the requirements
in subpart W, the EPA is proposing a few additional requirements under
subpart W for compressors subject to the proposed standards in NSPS
OOOOb or standards in an applicable approved state plan or applicable
Federal plan codified in 40 CFR part 62. First, subpart W requires
measurement of compressor sources that would not be required to be
measured under the proposed standards in NSPS OOOOb and the proposed
presumptive standards in EG OOOOc (e.g., blowdown valve leakage through
the blowdown vent). The EPA is proposing that reporters conducting
measurements of compressors under NSPS OOOOb or the applicable approved
state plan or applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62 would conduct
measurements of any other compressor sources required to be measured by
subpart W at the same time. Second, because the time between
measurements under the proposed standards in NSPS OOOOb and the
proposed presumptive standards in EG OOOOc may not result in
measurements being taken every reporting year, the EPA is proposing to
specify that reporters would use equation W-22 or equation W-27, as
applicable, to calculate emissions from all mode-source combinations
for any reporting year in which measurements are not required. Finally,
while we are proposing to eliminate the requirement to conduct a
measurement in not-operating-depressurized-mode at least once every 3
years for compressors in the industry segments for which reporters are
currently required to conduct ``as found'' measurements (as described
in section III.O.1 of this preamble), we note that the proposed
standards in NSPS OOOOb and the proposed presumptive standards in EG
OOOOc would only require measurements to be taken in operating-mode or
standby-pressurized-mode. If no compressor sources are measured in not-
operating-depressurized-mode, reporters would not have data to develop
reporter emission factors for that mode-source combination using
equation W-23 and equation W-28. Therefore, we are proposing in 40 CFR
98.233(o)(10)(i)(B) and 40 CFR 98.233(p)(10)(i)(B) that reporters with
compressors subject to NSPS OOOOb or the applicable approved state plan
or applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62 would be required to
conduct additional measurements of compressors in not-operating-
depressurized-mode such that they can develop an annual reporter
emission factor for isolation valve leakage in not-operating-
depressurized-mode. Based on an analysis of all reciprocating and
centrifugal compressor measurements for the other industry segments
since 2015, approximately one-third of all compressor measurements were
performed in not-operating-depressurized mode. We propose to maintain
that percentage for reciprocating and centrifugal compressor
measurements in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production and
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry
segments. Therefore, we are proposing to require reporters to measure
emissions in not-operating-depressurized mode from isolation valve
leakage for at least one-third of the subject compressors during any 3
consecutive calendar year period. We are also proposing to require
reporters to provide the total count of compressors measured in not-
operating-depressurized-mode over the previous 3 calendar years, as
well as the total number of compressors subject to NSPS OOOOb or the
applicable approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR
part 62. We request comment on other ways to collect sufficient
measurements to calculate a reporter emission factor for isolation
valve leakage in not-operating-depressurized-mode.
For facilities in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production
and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry
segments that do not conduct measurements, we are proposing to clarify
the language at 40 CFR 98.233(o)(10) and (p)(10) for compressors at
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production or Onshore
[[Page 50342]]
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting facilities, consistent
with section II.B of this preamble. The compressor emission factors for
these industry segments are specific to uncontrolled wet seal oil
degassing vents on centrifugal compressors and uncontrolled rod packing
emissions for reciprocating compressors. The language in 40 CFR
98.233(o) and (p) clearly indicates that the provisions of 40 CFR
98.233(o)(10) and (p)(10) do not apply for controlled compressor
sources. However, proposed revisions are necessary to provide clarity
regarding the compressor sources for which emissions are required to be
calculated under 40 CFR 98.233(o)(10) and (p)(10) and reported under 40
CFR 98.236(o)(5) and (p)(5). Specifically, we are proposing minor
revisions to 40 CFR 98.233(o)(10) and the corresponding reporting
requirements in 40 CFR 98.236(o)(5) to clarify that the compressor
count used in equation W-25 should be the number of centrifugal
compressors with atmospheric (i.e., uncontrolled) wet seal oil
degassing vents. Similarly, we are proposing minor revisions to 40 CFR
98.233(p)(10) and the corresponding reporting requirements in 40 CFR
98.236(p)(5) to clarify that the compressor count used in equation W-
29D should be the number of reciprocating compressors with atmospheric
(i.e., uncontrolled) rod packing emissions. We are also proposing to
add requirements to report the total number of centrifugal compressors
at the facility and the number of centrifugal compressors that have wet
seals to 40 CFR 98.236(o)(5) and proposing to add a requirement to
report the total number of reciprocating compressors at the facility to
40 CFR 98.236(p)(5). These additional data would provide the EPA with
an improved understanding of the total number of compressors and the
number of compressors that are controlled (i.e., routed to flares,
combustion, or vapor recovery systems) in the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting industry segments, consistent with section II.C of this
preamble.
In addition, consistent with section II.B of this preamble, we are
proposing to amend the CH4 and CO2 population
emission factors in equation W-29D for reciprocating compressors at
onshore petroleum and natural gas production and onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting facilities. The current population
emission factors were adopted from the 1996 GRI/EPA study Methane
Emissions from the Natural Gas Industry; Volume 8: Equipment Leaks.\95\
\96\ In the time since the promulgation of the current population
emission factor, Zimmerle et al. (2019) \97\ reported the results of a
nationally representative field assessment of equipment leak rates from
facilities in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and
Boosting industry segment. As part of this proposed rulemaking, the EPA
reviewed Zimmerle et al. (2019) to evaluate the potential for revisions
to the population emission factor in equation W-29D. We found that
Zimmerle et al. (2019) uses a larger and more representative sample of
412 rod packing vent measurements, compared to the 40 compressor
measurements available in the 1996 GRI/EPA study. Therefore, we are
proposing a population emission factor for CH4 based on the
average population emission rate measured by Zimmerle et al. (2019),
with a proposed CO2 population emission factor derived by
applying the ratio of the current CO2 emission factor to the
current CH4 emission factor to the CH4 emission
factor obtained from Zimmerle et al. (2019). For more information
regarding our review of Zimmerle et al. (2019) and the derivation of
the proposed emission factors, see the subpart W TSD, available in the
docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234. We
request comment on whether there are other studies or data sets that
provide information that could be used to further refine the emission
factors for both reciprocating and centrifugal compressors at onshore
petroleum and natural gas production and onshore petroleum and natural
gas gathering and boosting facilities, particularly data sets that
include measurements for all compressor sources (i.e., rod packing and
blowdown isolation valves for reciprocating compressors and wet seals,
dry seals, and blowdown isolation valves for centrifugal compressors).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\95\ The development of the current emission factors for
reciprocating compressors in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production or Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and
Boosting sectors are described in Compressor Modes and Thresholds,
U.S. EPA, November 2010, (Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0923-3580),
also available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
\96\ Campbell, L., M. Campbell, M. Cowgill, D. Epperson, M.
Hall, M. Harrison, K. Hummell, D. Myers, T. Shires, B. Stapper, C.
Stapper, J. Wessels, AND H. Williamson. Methane Emissions From the
Natural Gas Industry--Volume 8. Equipment Leaks. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/600/R-96/080h, also available
in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-
0234.
\97\ Zimmerle, D., Bennett, K., Vaughn, T., Luck, B.,
Lauderdale, T., Keen, K., Harrison, M., Marchese, A., Williams, L.,
& Allen, D. (2019). Characterization of methane emissions from
gathering compressor stations: final report. Mountain Scholar.
https://doi.org/10.25675/10217/194544. Available in the docket for
this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Compressors Routed to Controls
Centrifugal and reciprocating compressors are the only sources for
which capture for fuel use and thermal oxidizers currently are
specifically listed as dispositions for emissions that would otherwise
be vented (see 40 CFR 98.233(o) and (p) introductory text). The EPA's
intent with the provisions is to differentiate flares, which are
combustion devices that combust waste gases without energy recovery
(per 40 CFR 98.238), from combustion devices with energy recovery,
including for fuel use. However, some thermal oxidizers combust waste
gases without energy recovery and therefore may instead meet the
subpart W definition of flare. Consistent with section II.D of this
preamble, in order to emphasize that the EPA's intent is generally to
treat emissions routed to flares and combustion devices other than
flares consistently, we are proposing to remove the references to fuel
use and to thermal oxidizers in 40 CFR 98.233(o) and (p) and 40 CFR
98.236(o) and (p). Instead, we are proposing to define ``routed to
combustion'' in 40 CFR 98.238 to specify the types of non-flare
combustion equipment for which reporters would be expected to calculate
emissions. In particular, for the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production, Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting,
and Natural Gas Distribution industry segments, ``routed to
combustion'' would mean the combustion equipment specified in 40 CFR
98.232(c)(22), (i)(7), and (j)(12), respectively (i.e., the combustion
equipment for which emissions must be calculated per 40 CFR 98.233(z)).
For all other industry segments, ``routed to combustion'' would mean
the stationary combustion sources subject to subpart C. The proposed
definition of ``routed to combustion'' would apply for all subpart W
emission sources for which that term appears (e.g., natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps).
5. Reporting of Compressor Activity Data
We are proposing to remove some data elements that are redundant
between 40 CFR 98.236(o)(1) and (2) for centrifugal compressors and
between 40 CFR 98.236(p)(1) and (2) for reciprocating compressors.
Specifically, current 40 CFR 98.236(o)(1)(vi) and 40 CFR
98.236(p)(1)(viii) require reporters to indicate which individual
compressors are part of a manifolded
[[Page 50343]]
group of compressor sources, and current 40 CFR 98.236(o)(1)(vii)
through (ix) and 40 CFR 98.236(p)(1)(ix) through (xi) require reporters
to indicate whether individual compressors have compressor sources
routed to flares, vapor recovery, or combustion. However, current 40
CFR 98.236(o)(2)(ii)(A) and 40 CFR 98.236(p)(2)(ii)(A) require the same
information for each compressor leak or vent rather than by compressor.
The information collected for each leak or vent is more detailed and is
the information used for emissions calculations. Therefore, the EPA is
proposing to remove the redundant reporting requirements in existing 40
CFR 98.236(o)(1)(vi) through (ix) and existing 40 CFR
98.236(p)(1)(viii) through (xi), consistent with section II.B of this
preamble.
P. Equipment Leak Surveys
Subpart W reporters are currently required to quantify emissions
from equipment leaks using the calculation methods in 40 CFR 98.233(q)
(equipment leak surveys) and/or 40 CFR 98.233(r) (equipment leaks by
population count). The equipment leak survey method currently uses the
count of leakers detected with one of the subpart W leak detection
methods in 40 CFR 98.234(a), subpart W leaker emission factors, and
operating time to estimate the emissions from equipment leaks. The
current leaker emission factors applicable to onshore petroleum and
natural gas production and onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering
and boosting facilities are found in existing Table W-1E of subpart W.
These leaker emission factors are based on the EPA's Protocol for
Equipment Leak Emission Estimates published in 1995 (Docket Id. No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0927-0043), also available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234. The leaker emission
factors are provided for components in gas service, light crude
service, and heavy crude service that are found to be leaking via
several different screening methods. In addition to being component-
and service-specific, subpart W currently provides two different sets
of leaker emission factors: one based on leak rates for leaks
identified by Method 21 (see 40 CFR part 60, appendix A-7) using a leak
definition of 10,000 ppm and one based on leak rates for leaks
identified by Method 21 using a leak definition of 500 ppm. Currently,
the other leak screening methods provided in subpart W (OGI, infrared
laser beam illuminated instrument, and acoustic leak detection device)
use the leaker emission factors based on Method 21 data with a leak
definition of 10,000 ppm.
1. Revisions and Addition of Default Leaker Emission Factors
In the 2022 Proposed Rule, we proposed to revise the leaker
emission factors to provide separate leaker factors for leaks detected
using OGI based on recent study data from Zimmerle et al. (2020) and
Pacsi et al. (2019). For the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segments, the emission factors were calculated directly from
these study data. For downstream industry segments, separate OGI
emission factors were estimated using an ``OGI enhancement factor,''
which was estimated as the ratio between the OGI emission factors and
the Method 21 emission factors for the upstream industry segments. In
this proposed rulemaking and as described in more detail later in this
section, we are maintaining our proposal to provide separate emission
factors for leaks detected using OGI based on recent study data from
Zimmerle et al. (2020) and Pacsi et al. (2019). In this proposed
rulemaking, we are proposing an update to the emission factors provided
for downstream segments based on an ``OGI enhancement factor'' value
that has been updated since the June 2022 proposal. Additionally, in
this rulemaking we are proposing to use the Zimmerle et al. (2020) and
Pacsi et al. (2019) study data to provide Method 21 at leak definitions
of 500 ppm and 10,000 ppm. We expect these updated emission factors to
provide a more accurate estimation of emissions estimated with default
leaker emission factors as they use more recent data and are from a
dataset of a larger size than the current emission factors.
In the years that have followed the adoption of the leaker emission
factors into subpart W, there have been numerous studies regarding
emissions from equipment leaks that provide measurement data to update
the existing emission factors for leaks detected using Method 21 at a
leak definition of either 10,000 ppm or 500 ppm as well as to quantify
leaker emission factors for OGI screening methods at onshore petroleum
and natural gas production and onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facilities.\98\ With respect to the OGI
screening method, these studies have found that OGI identifies fewer
yet larger leaks than the EPA's Method 21. Specifically, the average
leaker emission factor determined from OGI leak detection surveys is
often a factor of two or more larger than leaker emission factors
determined when using Method 21 leak detection surveys. Therefore, the
application of the same leaker emission factor to leaking components
detected with OGI and Method 21 with a leak definition of 10,000 ppm,
as is currently done in subpart W, likely understates the emissions
from leakers detected with OGI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\98\ See, e.g., ERG (Eastern Research Group, Inc.) and Sage
(Sage Environmental Consulting, LP). City of Fort Worth Natural Gas
Air Quality Study: Final Report. July 13, 2011, available at https://www.fortworthtexas.gov/departments/development-services/gaswells/air-quality-study/final; Allen, D.T., et al. ``Measurements of
methane emissions at natural gas production sites in the United
States.'' Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the
United States of America, Vol. 110, no. 44. pp. 17768-17773, October
29, 2013, available at https://dept.ceer.utexas.edu/methane/study.
Docket Item No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2014-0831-0006; Pacsi, A.P., et al.
``Equipment leak detection and quantification at 67 oil and gas
sites in the Western United States.'' Elem Sci Anth, 7: 29,
available at https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.368. 2019; Zimmerle,
D., et al. ``Methane Emissions from Gathering Compressor stations in
the U.S.'' Environmental Science & Technology 2020, 54(12), 7552-
7561, available at https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.0c00516. The
documents are also available in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on our review of these studies, we are proposing to amend the
leaker emission factors in existing Table W-1E (proposed Table W-2) for
onshore petroleum and natural gas production and onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting facilities to update the Method 21
emission factors as well as include separate emission factors for
leakers detected with OGI, consistent with section II.B of this
preamble. We are proposing to revise the emission factors using study
data from Zimmerle et al. (2020) and Pacsi et al. (2019). The Zimmerle
et al. (2020) study contains hundreds of quantified leaks detected
using OGI. The Pacsi et al. (2019) study also contains hundreds of
equipment leak measurements from sites that were screened using Method
21 with a leak definition of 10,000 ppm and 500 ppm as well as OGI. We
are proposing the use of these studies as the basis for the proposed
emission factors because they included recent measurements of subpart
W-specified equipment leak components from both oil and gas production
and gathering and boosting sites in geographically diverse locations.
As noted above, numerous studies have found that the average size
of the leaks detected by OGI are larger than those detected by EPA's
Method 21. Using the Pacsi et al. study data, we estimate that the
leaks detected by OGI are 1.63 times larger than leaks detected by
Method 21 at a leak definition of
[[Page 50344]]
10,000 ppm and 2.81 times larger than leaks detected by Method 21 at a
leak definition of 500 ppm. As noted, the Pacsi et al. (2019) study
provided data on leaks detected by Method 21 at a leak definition of
10,000 ppm and 500 ppm as well as OGI data, however, the sample size of
leaks screened in the Pacsi et al. (2019) study with Method 21 is
smaller than those screened with OGI, particularly when combining the
OGI data from Pacsi et al. (2019) with the Zimmerle et al. (2020) data.
The combined OGI dataset from Pacsi et al. (2019) and Zimmerle et al.
(2020) contains more than 700 measurements from leaks detected with
OGI. Emission factors using these data are derived for each combination
of well site type (e.g., gas or oil) and component type (e.g., valve).
The more than 700 measurements in the combined OGI dataset results in
an average of 44 measurements for each combination of well site type
(e.g., gas or oil) and component type (e.g., valve). In contrast, the
Pacsi et al. study has nearly 300 measurements for leaks detected using
Method 21 at a leak definition of 500 ppm and 140 measurements for
leaks detected using Method 21 at a leak definition of 10,000 ppm,
which results in averages of 21 measurements and 10 measurements for
each combination of site type and component type, respectively.
For OGI, we are proposing leaker emission factors that were
developed using the combined data from Pacsi et al. (2019) and Zimmerle
et al. (2020) by site type (i.e., gas or oil). Equipment leaks are
inherently variable; therefore, sample size is important when seeking
to derive representative equipment leak emission factors. Therefore, we
are proposing to use the OGI data and the ratio between OGI and the
Method 21 at a leak definition of 10,000 ppm and a leak definition of
500 ppm (i.e., 1.63 and 2.81, respectively) to derive the proposed
emission factors for Method 21 at both leak definitions. This approach
uses the most robust set of data available (OGI) to derive the proposed
emission factors. The precise derivation of the proposed emission
factors is discussed in more detail in the subpart W TSD, available in
the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
At onshore petroleum and natural gas production and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting facilities, very few
facilities use infrared laser beam illuminated instruments or acoustic
leak detection devices to conduct equipment leak surveys and there are
no data available to develop leaker emission factors specific to these
methods. Based on our understanding of these alternative methods, we
expect that their leak detection thresholds would be most similar to
OGI, so that the average emissions per leak identified by these
alternative methods would be similar to the emissions estimated using
the proposed OGI leaker factors. Therefore, we are proposing that, if
these alternative methods are used to conduct leak surveys, the
proposed OGI leaker emission factors in proposed Table W-2 would be
used to quantify the emissions from the leaks identified using these
other monitoring methods. We are seeking comment on the performance of
infrared laser beam illuminated instruments and acoustic leak detection
devices including data that may support a separate detection method
specific emission factor or that supports the proposal that OGI
emission factors appropriately estimate leakers detected with these
methods.
As described in the introductory section III.P of this section of
this preamble, currently, equipment leak emissions quantified with the
leaker method are calculated using the count of leakers and a default
emission factor from existing Table W-1E that is specific to the type
of component (e.g., valve) and the service (i.e., gas or oil). For
onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting facilities,
subpart W currently specifies and would continue to specify that all
components should be considered to be in gas service consistent with
the language in 40 CFR 98.233(q)(2)(iv); thus, the gas service factors
from proposed Table W-2 should be applied to the count of equipment
leak components consistent with the leak detection method used.
For onshore petroleum and natural gas production facilities, we are
proposing to amend 40 CFR 98.233(q)(2)(iii) to state that onshore
petroleum and natural gas production facilities must use the
appropriate default whole gas leaker emission factors consistent with
the well type (rather than the component-level service type), where
components associated with gas wells are considered to be in gas
service and components associated with oil wells are considered to be
in oil service as listed in proposed Table W-2 to this subpart. This
proposed amendment is intended to ensure that the application of the
proposed emission factor using the well site type rather than
component-level service type is consistent with the derivation of the
emission factor. The emission factors were derived based on study-
reported well site type, accounting for the idea that a gas well site
can have components in oil service and vice versa, and thus would be
required to be applied by well site type.
As described previously, our analysis of measurement study data
from onshore production and gathering and boosting facilities
demonstrates that the OGI screening method finds fewer and larger leaks
than Method 21. Consequently, the leaker emission factors derived using
measurement data from the OGI screening method are larger than those
derived using the measurement data from Method 21 screening method. We
expect that the leaker emission factors for other industry segments
that are based on measurements of Method 21-identified leaks may
similarly underestimate the emissions from leaking equipment when OGI
(or other alternative methods besides Method 21) are used to detect the
leaks. In this proposal, we are applying the addition of an ``OGI
enhancement factor'' to the leaker emission factors for the other
subpart W industry segments, resulting in new proposed emission
factors, to ensure that facilities estimate the same equipment leak
emissions if they either (1) identify leaks with Method 21 and apply
the Method 21 derived emission factors or (2) identify leaks with OGI
and apply the OGI enhancement factor adjusted emission factors. More
specifically, we are proposing to apply the ``OGI enhancement'' factor
identified from measurement study data in the onshore production and
gathering and boosting industry segments, a value of 1.63, to the
leaker emission factors for the other subpart W industry segments as a
means to estimate and propose an OGI emission factor set. In other
words, the ``OGI enhancement factor'' is based on the average OGI-
identified leak being 1.63 times larger than the average Method 21-
identified leak when using a leak definition of 10,000 ppm in the
measurement study data. Analogous to the proposed changes in proposed
Table W-2 for the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production and
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry
segments, this results in the proposed addition of emission factor sets
specific to OGI, infrared laser beam illuminated instrument, or
acoustic leak detection device screening methods. The proposed emission
factor sets are included in proposed Tables W-4 and W-6 for the Onshore
Natural Gas Processing, Onshore Natural Gas Transmission Compression,
Underground Natural Gas Storage, LNG Storage, LNG Import and Export
Equipment, and Natural Gas Distribution industry segments. A
[[Page 50345]]
detailed description of the proposed emission factors is provided in
the subpart W TSD, available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
The existing reporting requirements for the equipment leak emission
source types that are quantified by leaker method include activity and
emissions data (i.e., count of leakers, annual average operating time,
CO2 emissions and CH4 emissions) on a per
component basis (e.g., valve, connector), consistent with the
component-level screening surveys and component-level default emission
factors. In addition to continuing to collect the existing activity
data, we are seeking comment on including a requirement to report the
major equipment type (e.g., wellhead, compressor, dehydrator) at which
the component-level leak is found. The collection of the major
equipment type associated with leakers could facilitate future
development of major equipment-based leaker factors and/or be combined
with the population of major equipment at facilities to facilitate
future development of the major equipment population emission factors.
Since the leak surveys are ground-level, the major equipment type is
expected to be known and this additional requirement would appear to
result in minimal increased burden. We are seeking comment on whether
it is appropriate to require the reporting of the type of major
equipment type in addition to the component type and specifically if
there are concerns regarding burden or data collection that should be
considered.
2. Addition of Undetected Leak Factor for Leaker Emission Estimation
Methods
Subpart W currently provides various screening methods for
detecting leaking components in 40 CFR 98.234(a). Each method includes
a unique instrument and associated procedure by which leaks are
detected. Variability inherently exists in each method's ability to
detect leaks and can be attributed to reasons associated with the
instrument, leak detection procedures, the operator or site conditions.
For example, some components may be inaccessible to be surveyed with
handheld devices that require close proximity to the leak to detect it
(e.g., Method 21 flame ionization detectors (FID)), while the same leak
could be visualized using an OGI camera that is less dependent on
proximity to the leak. Operators with varying levels of training or
expertise deploy the screening devices, resulting in operator
variability. Site-level conditions such as wind speed can also impact
the detection of leaks. We have reviewed recent study data from Pacsi
et al. (2019) in which multiple leak detection methods, including OGI
and Method 21, were deployed alongside one another at the same sites.
This study demonstrates that there are undetected leaks for each
method. Based on the Pacsi et al. (2019) study data, OGI observes 80
percent of emissions from measured leaks, Method 21 at a leak
definition of 10,000 ppm observes 65 percent of emissions from measured
leaks, and Method 21 at leak definition of 500 ppm observes 79 percent
of emissions from measured leaks. In order to account for the quantity
of emissions that remain undetected by each screening method, we are
proposing to provide a method specific adjustment factor, k, for the
calculation methods used to quantify emissions from equipment leaks
using the leaker method in 40 CFR 98.233(q). The proposed addition of a
method specific adjustment factor would be expected to improve the
accuracy of emissions data, consistent with section II.B of this
preamble. Further detail on the development of the adjustment factor
for each of these screening methods is provided in the subpart W TSD,
available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2023-0234.
As noted in section III.P.2 of this preamble, very few onshore
petroleum and natural gas production and onshore petroleum and natural
gas gathering and boosting facilities use infrared laser beam
illuminated instruments or acoustic leak detection devices to conduct
equipment leak surveys, so there are no data available to develop a
method-specific adjustment factor, k, for these detection methods.
Based on our understanding of these alternative methods, we expect that
their leak detection thresholds would be most similar to OGI, so that
the average emissions per leak identified by these alternative methods
would be similar to the emissions estimated using OGI. Therefore, we
are proposing that, if these alternative methods are used to conduct
leak surveys, the proposed OGI adjustment factor, k, would be used in
the calculation to quantify the emissions from the leaks identified
using these other monitoring methods. We are seeking comment on the
performance of infrared laser beam illuminated instruments and acoustic
leak detection devices, including data that may support a separate
detection method specific adjustment factor, k.
We are proposing the survey method-specific k value in equation W-
30 of 40 CFR 98.233(q)(2) such that the factor would be applied to the
emissions quantified using either the default or the proposed site-
specific emission factors, as discussed in section III.P.4 of this
preamble, to estimate equipment leak emissions. We are also proposing
the application of the k value to the emissions quantified using the
proposed direct measurement method discussed in section III.P.3 of this
preamble and in proposed 40 CFR 98.233(q)(3). The application of the k
factor is intended to account for undetected emissions such that the
reported emissions represent the actual site-level total, not limited
to the fraction of detected leaks. We are seeking comment on the
application of this factor to scale detected leak emissions.
Specifically, we are seeking additional data that either support the
application of this factor and the appropriate method-specific value
for this factor or support why the proposed factor should not be
applied to equipment leak emission estimates.
3. Addition of Method To Quantify Emissions Using Direct Measurement
As an alternative to the proposed revised default leaker emission
factors, we are also proposing in 40 CFR 98.233(q)(1) to provide an
option (provided in proposed 40 CFR 98. 233(q)(3)) that would allow
reporters to quantify emissions from equipment leak components in 40
CFR 98.233(q) by performing direct measurement of equipment leaks and
calculating emissions using those measurement results, consistent with
section II.B of this preamble. The proposed amendments would provide
that facilities with components subject to 40 CFR 98.233(q) can elect
to perform direct measurement of leaks using one of the existing
subpart W measurement methods in 40 CFR 98.234(b) through (d), such as
calibrated bagging or a high volume sampler. To use this proposed
option, all leaks identified during a ``complete leak detection
survey'' must be quantified; in other words, reporters could not use
leaker emission factors for some leaks and quantify other leaks
identified during the same leak detection survey. For the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production industry segment, proposed 40 CFR
98.233(q)(1) specifies that a complete leak detection survey would be
the fugitive emissions monitoring of a well site using a method in 40
CFR 98.234(a) which is conducted to comply with NSPS OOOOa, NSPS OOOOb,
or the applicable EPA-approved state plan or the applicable Federal
plan in 40 CFR part 62 or, if the reporter elected to conduct the leak
detection survey, a complete survey of all equipment on a single well-
pad. For the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
[[Page 50346]]
and Boosting industry segment, proposed 40 CFR 98.233(q)(1) specifies
that a complete leak detection survey would be the fugitive emissions
monitoring of a compressor station using a method in 40 CFR 98.234(a)
which is conducted to comply with NSPS OOOOa, NSPS OOOOb, or the
applicable EPA-approved state plan or the applicable Federal plan in 40
CFR part 62 or, if the reporter elected to conduct the leak detection
survey, a complete survey of all equipment at a ``gathering and
boosting site'' (and we are proposing to define this term in 40 CFR
98.238, as described in section III.D of this preamble). For downstream
industry segments (e.g., Onshore Natural Gas Transmission Compression),
a complete leak detection survey is facility-wide, and therefore, the
election to perform direct measurement of leaks would also be facility-
wide. In other words, this option would allow the use of measurement
data directly when all leaks identified are quantitatively measured.
The proposed amendments rely specifically on quantitative
measurement methods already provided in the rule. We are seeking
comment on alternative methods for quantifying leaks for use for these
equipment leak measurements (and for ``as found'' compressor
measurements) along with supporting information and data. The
supporting information should include description of the method,
limitations on the applicability of the method, and calibration
requirements. Supporting data should include accuracy assessments
(e.g., controlled release assessments) relative to other quantitative
measurement methods provided in the rule.
4. Addition of a Method To Develop Site-Specific Component-Level Leaker
Emission Factors
As noted in section III.P of this preamble, facilities are
currently required to perform leak surveys to determine the number of
leaking components. The results of these surveys (i.e., the count of
leakers) are used with default emission factors to estimate the
quantity of resulting emissions. As noted in the previous section, the
EPA is proposing an additional option for facilities to conduct leak
surveys and perform direct measurement to quantify the emissions from
equipment leak components.
The EPA recognizes that while direct measurement is the most
accurate method for determining equipment leak emissions, it may also
be time consuming and costly. In consideration of both the advantages
of and potential burdens associated with direct measurement, the EPA is
also proposing to provide facilities with a method to use direct
measurement from leak surveys to develop component level emission
factors based on site-specific leak measurement data. The site-specific
emission factors would provide increased accuracy over the use of
default emission factors, consistent with section II.B of this
preamble, while lessening a portion of the burden of directly measuring
every leak.
We are proposing that facilities that elect to follow the direct
measurement provisions in proposed 40 CFR 98.233(q)(3)(i) must track
the individual measurements of natural gas flow rate by specific
component type (valve, connector, etcetera, as applicable for the
industry segment) and leak detection method. We are proposing three
different bins for the leak detection methods: Method 21 using a leak
definition of 500 ppm as specified in 40 CFR 98.234(a)(2)(i); Method 21
using a leak definition of 10,000 ppm as specified in 40 CFR
98.234(a)(2)(ii); and OGI and other leak detection methods as specified
in 40 CFR 98.234(a)(1), (3), or (5). We are proposing that reporters
would have to compile at least 50 individual measurements of natural
gas flow rate for a specific component type and leak detection method
(e.g., gas service valves detected by OGI) before they can develop and
use the site-specific emission factors for the component types at the
facility. We are proposing that these flow rate measurements would be
required to be converted to standard conditions following the
procedures in 40 CFR 98.233(t). We are proposing that the volumetric
measurements comprised of at least 50 measured leakers must then be
summed and divided by the total number of leaks measurements for that
component type and leak detection method combination. The resulting
value would be an emission factor in units of standard cubic feet per
hour-component (scf/hr-component). The site-specific emission factor is
proposed to be used, when available, to calculate equipment leak
emissions following the procedures in 40 CFR 98.233(q)(2). Because some
equipment component types are more prevalent and more likely to reach
50 leak measurements than other components, application of the
calculation methodology in 40 CFR 98.233(q)(2) may include a default
leaker factors for some components and site-specific leaker factors for
other components.
For example, a hypothetical onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facility has 30 single well-pad sites, at which during a
reporting year they perform complete leak surveys of all components and
direct measurements of all components found leaking at 20 of the single
well-pad sites and they perform leak detection surveys only (i.e., no
measurement) at the remaining 10 single well-pad sites. In this
example, during the leak detection surveys at the 20 sites where
measurements were also performed, the facility obtained sufficient
measurements from valves (i.e., more than 50 measurements) to develop a
site-specific emission factor in accordance with proposed 40 CFR
98.233(q)(4). They did not measure enough components, however, of any
other type (e.g., connector, open-ended line, pressure relief valve) to
develop site-specific emission factors for these components. For this
example, under the proposed provisions the facility must use the
methods in 40 CFR 98.233(q)(1) and (3) to quantify emissions for that
reporting year. The facility would be required to quantify emissions
from the 20 monitored and directly measured single well-pad sites in
accordance with proposed 40 CFR 98.233(q)(3). Beginning in the
reporting year the measurements were made, the facility must develop
and apply the site-specific emission factor for valves to any valve
found leaking which was not directly measured (i.e., valves at the 10
sites where only leak surveys and no measurements were performed)
rather than applying the default emission factor. This facility would
quantify emissions from the 10 single well sites where no measurement
was performed using the count of components found leaking and the
default leaker emission factors for all components in accordance with
40 CFR 98.233(q)(1) except valves, where the site-specific emission
factor must be used. If in subsequent reporting years, the facility is
required to perform additional surveys or elects to continue to survey
and perform direct measurement, the facility will accumulate additional
measurements which may be of a sufficient number to develop other
component type site-specific emission factors. We also note that in
accordance with proposed 40 CFR 98.233(q)(4), any additional
measurements of a component for which a facility has developed a site-
specific emissions factor (e.g., valves in the described example) would
be required to be used to update the site-specific emission factor
annually.
We are proposing to require the use of a minimum of 50 measurements
to ensure a statistically representative dataset. We have found that
equipment
[[Page 50347]]
leak measurements are highly variable and it is imperative to ensure a
robust sample size. We have performed statistical analyses with
measurements from compressors and determined that a minimum of 50
measurements is required to reduce uncertainty to factor of 3 of the
true value.\99\ We are seeking comment on the required number of
measurements by component type and leak detection method, specifically
on whether the number is or is not appropriate, whether a different
number is appropriate, and the supporting rationale.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\99\ Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: Technical Support for Leak
Detection Methodology Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations
for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems Final Rule. November 2016.
Docket Item No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0764-0066; also available in the
docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are also proposing in 40 CFR 98.236(q) to require that the
emissions be reported at the aggregation of calculated or measured
values for the combination of component type and leak detection method.
As discussed in more detail in section III.P.1 of this preamble,
numerous studies have shown that different leak detection methods
identify different populations of leaking components; therefore,
consistent with the delineation of the default emission factors by leak
detection method, site-specific emission factors are proposed to be
delineated in the same way.
5. Removal of Additional Method 21 Screening Survey for Other Screening
Survey Methods
We are proposing to remove the additional Method 21 screening when
a survey is conducted using a method other than Method 21. Currently,
facilities using survey methods other than Method 21 to detect
equipment leaks may then screen the equipment identified as leaking
using Method 21 to determine if the leak measures greater than 10,000
parts per million by volume (ppmv) (see, e.g., 40 CFR 98.234(a)(1)). If
the Method 21 screening of the leaking equipment is less than 10,000
ppmv, then reporters may consider that equipment as not leaking. In the
2016 subpart W revisions, we added a leak detection methodology at 40
CFR 98.234(a)(6) (proposed 40 CFR 98.234(a)(1)(ii) in this proposal)
for using OGI in accordance with NSPS OOOOa, which does not include an
option for additional Method 21 screening. As noted in response to
comments on the subpart W proposal regarding the absence of this
optional additional Method 21 screening when using OGI in accordance
with NSPS OOOOa, the additional screening of OGI-identified leaking
equipment using Method 21 requires additional effort from reporters (81
FR 86500, November 30, 2016). Furthermore, as noted previously in this
section, the average emissions of leakers identified by OGI are greater
than leaks identified by Method 21. Directly applying the number of
OGI-identified leaks to the subpart W leaker emission factor specific
to that survey method would provide the most accurate estimate of
emissions, while selectively screening OGI-identified leaks using
Method 21 to reduce the number of reportable leakers would yield a low
bias in the reported emissions. Additionally, this would be incongruous
with the proposed application and supporting rationale of the proposed
monitoring method-specific adjustment factor, k (where the k value for
Method 21 with a leak definition of 10,000 ppm would need to be
applied) if OGI-identified leaks could be considered non-leaks based on
subsequent Method 21 monitoring. Therefore, we are proposing to require
reporters to directly use the leak survey results for the monitoring
method used to conduct the complete leak survey and are proposing to
eliminate this additional Method 21 screening provision. These proposed
amendments are expected to provide more accurate emissions data,
consistent with section II.B of this preamble.
6. Amendments Related to Oil and Natural Gas Standards and Emissions
Guidelines in 40 CFR Part 60
As noted in the introduction to section II. of this preamble, the
EPA recently proposed NSPS OOOOb and EG OOOOc for certain oil and
natural gas new and existing affected sources, respectively. Under the
proposed standards in NSPS OOOOb and the proposed presumptive standards
in EG OOOOc, owners and operators would be required to implement a
fugitive emissions monitoring and repair program for the collection of
fugitive emissions components at well site, centralized production
facility and compressor station affected sources. In addition, the
proposed NSPS OOOOb and EG OOOOc include a proposed appendix K to 40
CFR part 60, specifying an OGI-based method for detecting leaks and
fugitive emissions from all components that is not currently provided
in subpart W. The EPA also proposed provisions in NSPS OOOOb and EG
OOOOc for equipment leak detection and repair at onshore natural gas
processing facilities. Similar to the 2016 amendments to subpart W (81
FR 4987, January 29, 2016), the EPA is proposing to revise the
calculation methodology for equipment leaks in subpart W so that data
derived from equipment leak and fugitive emissions monitoring using one
of the methods in 40 CFR 98.234(a) which is conducted under NSPS OOOOb
or the applicable approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in 40
CFR part 62 would be used to calculate emissions, consistent with
section II.B of this preamble.
First, under these proposed amendments, facilities with certain
fugitive emissions components at a well site, centralized production
facility or compressor station subject to NSPS OOOOb or an applicable
approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62 would
use the data derived from the NSPS OOOOb or applicable 40 CFR part 62
fugitive emissions requirements along with the subpart W equipment leak
survey calculation methodology and leaker emission factors to calculate
and report their GHG emissions to the GHGRP. Specifically, the proposed
amendments would expand the existing cross-reference to 40 CFR 60.5397a
to also include the analogous requirements in NSPS OOOOb or 40 CFR part
62. Facilities with fugitive emissions components not subject to the
standards in the proposed NSPS OOOOb or addressed by standards in a
state or Federal plan following finalization of the proposed EG OOOOc
would continue to be able to elect to calculate subpart W equipment
leak emissions using the leak survey calculation methodology and leaker
emission factors (as is currently provided in 40 CFR 98.233(q)).
Therefore, reporters with other fugitive emission sources at subpart W
facilities not covered by NSPS OOOOb or a state or Federal plan in 40
CFR part 62 (e.g., sources subject to other state regulations and
sources participating in the Methane Challenge Program or other
voluntarily implemented programs) would continue to have the
opportunity to voluntarily use the proposed leak detection methods to
calculate and report their GHG emissions to the GHGRP. To facilitate
this proposed requirement, we are also proposing to clarify in proposed
40 CFR 98.233(q)(1)(vi)(B) and (C) that fugitive emissions monitoring
conducted using one of the methods in 40 CFR 98.234(a) to comply with
NSPS OOOOb or an applicable approved state plan or applicable Federal
plan in 40 CFR part 62, respectively, is considered a ``complete leak
detection survey,'' so that onshore petroleum and natural gas
[[Page 50348]]
production and onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities would be able to comply with the proposed requirement to use
NSPS OOOOb or 40 CFR part 62 fugitive emission surveys directly for
their subpart W reports. We are also proposing to move the
specification that fugitive emissions monitoring conducted to comply
with NSPS OOOOa is considered a ``complete leak detection survey'' from
existing 40 CFR 98.233(q)(2)(i) to proposed 40 CFR 98.233(q)(1)(vi)(A)
so that all the provisions regarding what constitutes a ``complete leak
detection survey'' are together. In a corresponding amendment, we are
also proposing to expand the current reporting requirement in existing
40 CFR 98.236(q)(1)(iii) (proposed 40 CFR 98.236(q)(1)(iv)) to require
reporters to indicate if any of the surveys of well sites, centralized
production facilities or compressor stations used in calculating
emissions under 40 CFR 98.233(q) were conducted to comply with the
fugitive emissions standards in NSPS OOOOb or an applicable approved
state plan or applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62.\100\ We
request comment on these proposed amendments and whether there are
other provisions or reporting requirements relative to NSPS OOOOb or EG
OOOOc that we should consider for revisions to requirements under
subpart W.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\100\ We are similarly proposing to revise the existing
reporting requirement in subpart W related to NSPS OOOOa, such that
reporters would report whether any of the surveys of well sites or
compressor stations used in calculating emissions under 40 CFR
98.233(q) were conducted to comply with the fugitive emissions
standards in NSPS OOOOa (rather than simply reporting whether the
facility has well sites or compressor stations subject to the
fugitive emissions standards in NSPS OOOOa).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, we are proposing to revise 40 CFR 98.234(a) to clarify and
consolidate the requirements for OGI and Method 21 in 40 CFR
98.234(a)(1) and (2), respectively. In the 2016 amendments to subpart W
(81 FR 4987, January 29, 2016), the EPA added 40 CFR 98.234(a)(6) and
(7) to provide OGI and Method 21 as specified in NSPS OOOOa as leak
detection survey methods. In part, structuring the amendment this way
allowed the EPA to provide the NSPS OOOOa leak detection methods as
allowable methods under subpart W without affecting the requirements
for facilities and industry segments not subject to NSPS OOOOa.
However, as the EPA continues to propose additional standards with
slightly different variations on OGI and Method 21, it would be
unnecessarily convoluted organizationally to continue to add those
methods and cross-references to each standard to the end of 40 CFR
98.234(a). Therefore, the EPA is proposing to move 40 CFR 98.234(a)(1)
and 40 CFR 98.234(a)(6) to 40 CFR 98.234(a)(1)(i) and 40 CFR
98.234(a)(1)(ii), respectively, which would consolidate the OGI-based
methods in 40 CFR 98.234(a)(1). Similarly, the EPA is proposing to
revise 40 CFR 98.234(a)(2) such that 40 CFR 98.234(a)(2)(i) is Method
21 with a leak definition of 10,000 ppm and 40 CFR 98.234(a)(2)(ii) is
Method 21 with a leak definition of 500 ppm. This proposed amendment
would effectively move 40 CFR 98.234(a)(7) to 40 CFR 98.234(a)(2)(ii).
We are also proposing that the references to ``components listed in
Sec. 98.232'' would be replaced with a more specific reference to 40
CFR 98.233(q)(1). The references to specific provisions in 40 CFR
60.5397a in 40 CFR 98.234(a)(6) and (7) would be moved to 40 CFR
98.234(a)(1)(ii) and 40 CFR 98.234(a)(2), as applicable.
In December 2022, the EPA proposed in NSPS OOOOb and EG OOOOc that
owners and operators of natural gas processing facilities would detect
leaks using an OGI-based monitoring method following the concurrently
proposed appendix K to 40 CFR part 60. We are proposing to include that
same method in subpart W at 40 CFR 98.234(a)(1)(iii) to ensure that
reporters of those facilities would be able to comply with the proposed
subpart W requirement to use data derived from the NSPS OOOOb or 40 CFR
part 62 fugitive emissions requirements for purposes of calculating
emissions from equipment leaks. In addition, as part of the December
2022 proposal of NSPS OOOOb and EG OOOOc, the EPA proposed an
alternative screening approach for fugitive emissions from well sites,
centralized production facilities and compressor stations that would
allow the use of advanced measurement technologies to detect large
equipment leaks. Under the NSPS OOOOb and EG OOOOc proposal, if
emissions are detected using one of these advanced technologies,
facilities would be required to conduct monitoring using OGI or Method
21 to identify and repair specific leaking equipment. Additionally,
under the NSPS OOOOb and EG OOOOc proposal, even if no emissions are
identified during a screening survey, some facilities using these
advanced technologies would still be required to conduct annual
fugitive emissions monitoring using OGI. The EPA's intent in this
proposed rule for subpart W is that the results of those NSPS OOOOb and
40 CFR part 62 OGI or Method 21 surveys would be used for purposes of
calculating emissions for subpart W, as OGI and Method 21 are capable
of identifying leaks from individual components and they are leak
detection methods provided in subpart W. The EPA also requests comment
on additional methods or advanced technologies that can identify
individual leaking components. Based on the information received, the
EPA would need to review the specific method and leak detection data
collected using that method to determine what default leaker emission
factors would apply for that method and whether any adjustments might
be needed to the subpart W equipment leak survey calculation
methodology when using that method. Following that review, the EPA may
undertake a future rulemaking process to include the additional leak
detection method(s) in 40 CFR 98.234(a).
Third, we are proposing subpart W requirements for onshore natural
gas processing facilities consistent with certain requirements for
equipment leaks in the proposed NSPS OOOOb or EG OOOOc. Currently,
onshore natural gas processing facilities must conduct at least one
complete survey of all the components listed in 40 CFR 98.232(d)(7)
each year, and each complete survey must be considered when calculating
emissions according to 40 CFR 98.233(q)(2). Under the equipment leak
detection and repair program included in proposed NSPS OOOOb and the EG
OOOOc presumptive standards, different component types may be monitored
on different frequencies, so all equipment at the facility is not
always monitored at the same time. According to the current
requirements in 40 CFR 98.233(q), surveys that do not include all of
the applicable equipment at the facility are not considered complete
surveys and are not used for purposes of calculating emissions.
Therefore, we are proposing in 40 CFR 98.233(q)(1)(vi)(F) that onshore
natural gas processing facilities subject to NSPS OOOOb or an
applicable approved state plan or the applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR
part 62 would use the data derived from each equipment leak survey
conducted as required by NSPS OOOOb or the relevant subpart of 40 CFR
part 62 along with the subpart W equipment leak survey calculation
methodology and leaker emission factors to calculate and report GHG
emissions to the GHGRP, even if a survey required for compliance with
NSPS OOOOb or 40 CFR part 62 does
[[Page 50349]]
not include all the component types listed in 40 CFR 98.232(d)(7).
Under this proposed amendment, reporters would still have to meet
the subpart W requirement to conduct at least one complete survey of
all applicable equipment at the facility per year, so if there were
components listed in 40 CFR 98.232(d)(7) not included in any NSPS OOOOb
or 40 CFR part 62-required surveys conducted during the year (e.g.,
connectors that are monitored only once every 4 years), reporters
subject to NSPS OOOOb or 40 CFR part 62 would need to either add those
components to one of their required surveys, making that a complete
survey for purposes of subpart W, or conduct a separate complete survey
for purposes of subpart W. We expect that reporters with onshore
natural gas processing plants implementing traditional leak detection
and repair programs are already making similar decisions regarding how
to meet the requirement to conduct a complete survey for subpart W, and
our intention with this proposed amendment is not to change those
decisions. Rather, this amendment would specify that surveys conducted
pursuant to NSPS OOOOb or 40 CFR part 62 that do not include all
component types listed in 40 CFR 98.232(d)(7) would be used for
calculating emissions along with each complete survey.
We are also proposing to add leaker emission factors for all survey
methods for ``other'' components that would be required to be monitored
under NSPS OOOOb or an approved state plan or applicable Federal plan
in 40 CFR part 62 or that reporters elect to survey that are not
currently included in subpart W. These proposed THC leaker emission
factors for the ``other'' component type are of the same value as the
THC leaker emission factors for the ``other'' component type for the
Onshore Natural Gas Transmission Compression and the Underground
Natural Gas Storage industry segments (existing Table W-3A and Table W-
4A, respectively, proposed Table W-4). For more information on the
derivation of the original emission factors, see the 2010 subpart W
TSD,\101\ and for more information on the derivation of the ``other''
component type emission factor proposed to be applied to these types of
leaks at facilities in the Onshore Natural Gas Processing industry
segment, see the TSD for the 2016 amendments to subpart W.\102\ In a
corresponding amendment, we are also proposing to expand the reporting
requirement in existing 40 CFR 98.236(q)(1)(iii) (proposed 40 CFR
98.236(q)(1)(iv)) to require onshore natural gas processing reporters
to indicate if any of the surveys used in calculating emissions under
40 CFR 98.233(q) were conducted to comply with the equipment leak
standards in NSPS OOOOb or an applicable approved state plan or the
applicable Federal plan in 40 CFR part 62. We request comment on the
proposed amendments to subpart W for onshore natural gas processing
facilities subject to the equipment leak provisions of NSPS OOOOb or 40
CFR part 62, as well as whether there are other provisions or reporting
requirements for these facilities that we should consider.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\101\ Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting from the Petroleum and
Natural Gas Systems Industry: Background Technical Support. November
2010. Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0923-3610; also available in
the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
\102\ Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: Technical Support for Leak
Detection Methodology Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations
for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems. November 1, 2016. Docket Id.
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0764-0066; also available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, in our review of subpart W equipment leak requirements for
onshore natural gas processing facilities, we found that the leak
definition for the Method 21-based requirements for processing plants
in NSPS OOOOa (as well as proposed NSPS OOOOb and EG OOOOc presumptive
standards) is not consistent with the leak definition in the Method 21
option in current 40 CFR 98.234(a)(2), which is the only Method 21-
based method available to onshore natural gas processing facilities
under subpart W. Based on this review, and to complement the proposed
addition of default leaker emission factors for survey methods other
than Method 21 (as described previously in this preamble), we are
proposing several additions to the equipment leak survey requirements
for the Onshore Natural Gas Processing industry segment, beyond those
amendments already described related to the proposed NSPS OOOOb and EG
OOOOc presumptive standards. First, we are proposing default leaker
emission factors for Method 21 at a leak definition of 500 ppm in
proposed Table W-4. As with the proposed ``other'' component type
leaker emission factors, these proposed leaker emission factors (i.e.,
valve, connector, open-ended line, pressure relief valve and meter) are
of the same value as the THC leaker emission factors for the Onshore
Natural Gas Transmission Compression and the Underground Natural Gas
Storage industry segments (existing Table W-3A and Table W-4A,
respectively). For more information on the derivation of those emission
factors, see the TSD for the 2016 amendments to subpart W.\103\ In
addition, we are proposing to add 40 CFR 98.233(q)(1)(v) to indicate
that onshore natural gas processing facilities not subject to NSPS
OOOOb or an approved state plan or the applicable Federal plan in 40
CFR part 62 may use any method specified in 40 CFR 98.234(a), including
Method 21 with a leak definition of 500 ppm and OGI following the
provisions of appendix K to 40 CFR part 60. This proposed amendment
would ensure that equipment leak surveys conducted using any of the
approved methods in subpart W would be available for purposes of
calculating emissions, not just those surveys conducted using one of
the methods currently provided in 40 CFR 98.234(a)(1) through (5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\103\ Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: Technical Support for Leak
Detection Methodology Revisions and Confidentiality Determinations
for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems. November 1, 2016. Docket Id.
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0764-0066; also available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. Exemption for Components in Vacuum Service
Through correspondence with the EPA via e-GGRT, some reporters have
stated that certain equipment leak components at their facility are in
vacuum service. These reporters indicated that there are no fugitive
emissions expected from components in vacuum service. After
consideration of these comments and in order to be consistent with
other EPA equipment leak regulatory programs (e.g., 40 CFR part 60,
subpart VVa), we have determined that we agree with commenters.
Therefore, we are proposing an exemption in the introductory paragraphs
of 40 CFR 98.233(q) and (r) for leak components in vacuum service from
the requirement to estimate and report emissions from these components.
We are also proposing a definition in 40 CFR 98.238 for the term ``in
vacuum service.'' We are proposing to require the reporting of the
count of equipment in vacuum service to enable verification of the
reported data (i.e., ability to confirm that all equipment for which
emissions are expected has been accounted for and an indication that
other equipment has been confirmed to meet the proposed definition of
``in vacuum service'').
Q. Equipment Leaks by Population Count
As noted in section III.P of this preamble, subpart W reporters are
currently required to quantify emissions from equipment leaks using the
[[Page 50350]]
calculation methods in 40 CFR 98.233(q) (equipment leak surveys) and/or
40 CFR 98.233(r) (equipment leaks by population count), depending upon
the industry segment. The equipment leaks by population count method
uses the count of equipment components, subpart W emission factors
(e.g., existing Table W-1A for the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production industry segment), and operating time to estimate emissions
from equipment leaks. For the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segments, the count of equipment components currently may be
determined by counting each component individually for each facility
(Component Count Method 2) or the count of equipment components may be
estimated using the count of major equipment and subpart W default
average component counts for major equipment (Component Count Method 1)
in existing Tables W-1B and W-1C, as applicable. Reporters in other
industry segments currently must count each applicable component at the
facility. We are proposing several amendments to the calculation
methodology provisions of 40 CFR 98.233(r) and the reporting
requirements in 40 CFR 98.236(r) to improve the quality of the data
collected, consistent with sections II.B and II.C of this preamble.
1. Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production and Onshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting Population Count Method
The current population emission factors for the Onshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Production and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting industry segments are found in existing Table W-
1A of subpart W. The gas service population emission factors are based
on the 1996 GRI/EPA study Methane Emissions from the Natural Gas
Industry, Volume 8: Equipment Leaks (available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234). The oil service
population emission factors are based on the American Petroleum
Institute's (API) Emission Factors for Oil and Gas Production
Operations, Publication 4615, published in 1995.
As noted previously in this section, when estimating emissions
using the population count method, onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facilities and onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering
and boosting facilities currently have the option to use actual
component counts (i.e., Component Count Method 2) or to estimate their
component counts using the count of major equipment (e.g., wellhead)
and default component counts per major equipment (e.g., valves per
wellhead) included in existing Tables W-1B and W-1C of subpart W (i.e.,
Component Count Method 1). In reviewing subpart W data, we find that
the vast majority (greater than 95 percent) of onshore production and
natural gas gathering and boosting facilities use Component Count
Method 1 to estimate the count of components.
It is important to note that both the population count emission
factors and the default component counts per major equipment currently
included in Tables W-1A, W-1B and W-1C are service-specific (i.e., gas
or oil) as well as region-specific (i.e., eastern or western U.S.). The
regional designations are provided by U.S. state in existing Table W-1D
of subpart W such that a facility would determine the facility's region
and select the appropriate region- and service-specific factors.
In the years that have followed the adoption of these emission
factors into subpart W, there have been numerous studies regarding
emissions from equipment leaks at onshore production and gathering and
boosting facilities. Two recent field studies, Pacsi et al. (2019)
\104\ and Zimmerle et al. (2020),\105\ have performed an equipment and
component inventory alongside equipment leak screening and measurement
results. Another recent study, Rutherford et al. (2021),\106\ included
synthesis and analysis of measurements from component-level field
studies. These studies' data allow development of study-estimated
population emission factors as well as study-estimated default
component counts per major equipment and comparison of them to those in
subpart W. Comparison of the study-estimated default component counts
per major equipment found that the subpart W values underestimate the
count of components found on major equipment in the field (Zimmerle et
al., 2020; Pacsi et al., 2019). Regarding a comparison of the
population emission factors and component counts per major equipment
between the subpart W eastern and western values, Zimmerle et al.
(2020) was the only field study to include both eastern and western
facilities, and the study values showed ``no statistically significant
differences between eastern and western U.S. regions.'' Rutherford et
al. (2021) also found their study-estimated population emission factors
to be higher than those in subpart W, noting that one of the
contributing factors to this difference was the use of the eastern
factors in subpart W, which appear to significantly undercount
emissions. Rutherford et al. (2021) noted that the impact of the use of
the eastern factors has grown over time as the production in the
eastern region of the U.S. has increased from less than 5 percent of
gas produced to nearly 30 percent of the gas produced.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\104\ Pacsi, A.P. et al. Equipment leak detection and
quantification at 67 oil and gas sites in the Western United States.
Elementa (2019). https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.368. Available in
the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
\105\ Zimmerle, D., et al. Methane Emissions from Gathering
Compressor Stations in the U.S. Environmental Science & Technology
54 (12), 7552-7561 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.0c00516.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2023-0234.
\106\ Rutherford, J.S., Sherwin, E.D., Ravikumar, A.P. et al.
Closing the methane gap in US oil and natural gas production
inventories. Nat Commun 12, 4715 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-25017-4. Available in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the 2022 Proposed Rule, we proposed to revise the current
population emission factors to use major equipment-based emission
factors developed using a combination of data from Zimmerle et al.,
2020 and Pacsi et al., 2019. As described in more detail below,
consistent with the 2022 Proposed Rule, we are again proposing revised
emission factors on a per major equipment basis rather than on a per
component basis. However, in this proposed rulemaking, we are proposing
to use the data from Rutherford et al. (2021), which is comprised of
several published studies including Pacsi et al. 2019, to inform the
emission factor values. As described in more detail below, the
Rutherford et al. (2021) study represents the largest dataset set
available and thus, more accurately accounts for the variability
observed in equipment leak measurement data in terms of the size and
frequency of leaks.
Based on our review of these studies, our assessment is that they
support revision of the population count method and corresponding
emission factors for onshore petroleum and natural gas production and
onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting facilities and
we are proposing to amend this population count method and
corresponding emission factors after consideration of these more recent
study data, consistent with section II.B of this preamble. These
proposed amendments include new population emission factors that are on
a per major equipment basis rather than a per component basis. As
mentioned previously, the vast majority of reporters estimate the
component counts using
[[Page 50351]]
Component Count Method 1. By providing emission factors on a major
equipment basis instead of by component, we would eliminate the step to
estimate the number of components. All facilities would be able to
count the actual number of major equipment and consistently apply the
same emission factor to calculate emissions. This would reduce reporter
burden and reduce the number of errors in the calculation of emissions,
as we find that numerous facilities incorrectly estimate the number of
components using Component Count Method 1 while providing consistently
estimated emission results.
In comparing the recent study data for this proposal, our
assessment is that the Rutherford et al. (2021) study represents the
most robust sample size of approximately 3,700 measurements for
developing population emission factors by major equipment. The larger
sample size is likely more representative of varying degrees of leak
detection and repair programs (i.e., not only facilities conducting
frequent surveys), which can impact the number of leaks found during
surveys (i.e., if more frequent surveys are being conducted and leaks
are being repaired in a timely manner, then each survey likely finds
less leaks). The Rutherford et al. (2021) study also employs a
bootstrap resampling statistical approach \107\ that allows for the
inclusion of infrequent large emitters (i.e., ``super-emitters'') in
the development of the emission factors, improving the representation
of the inherent variability of equipment leaks in the developed
emission factors. Therefore, we are proposing major equipment emission
factors developed using Rutherford et al. (2021) to provide population
emission factors by major equipment and site type (i.e., natural gas
system or petroleum system). The proposed emission factors were taken
from Supplementary Tables 3 and 4 of Rutherford et al. (2021). The
average emission factors presented in these study tables were converted
from units of kilograms per day to standard cubic feet of whole gas per
hour for cumulative equipment component leaks from different types of
major equipment including wellheads, separator, heater, meter including
headers, compressor, dehydrator and tanks. The major equipment
indicating venting emissions (e.g., tanks--unintentional vents) or
emissions from other sources also covered by subpart W (e.g., liquids
unloading, flaring, pumps) are not included in the proposed equipment
leak population emission factors. Specific to meters/piping and
consistent with current requirements related to meters/piping at
existing 40 CFR 98.233(r)(2)(i)(A), we are proposing in 40 CFR
98.233(r)(2) to specify that one meters/piping equipment should be
included per well-pad for onshore petroleum and natural gas production
operations and the count of meters in the facility should be used for
this equipment category at onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering
and boosting facilities. As a consequence of the broader scope of
equipment surveyed in the study data that inform Rutherford et al.
(2021), the proposed emission factors in proposed Table W-1 include
more pieces of major equipment than are currently included in Table W-
1B and W-1C of subpart W. A complete description of the derivation of
the proposed emission factors is discussed in more detail in the
subpart W TSD, available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id.
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234. The proposed major equipment emission factors
would replace the current component-based emission factors in the
existing Table W-1A. We are also proposing to remove Tables W-1B, W-1C,
and W-1D since they would no longer be needed for the population count
method for these industry segments. We are proposing amendments to the
reporting requirements for the use of the population count method to
align with the reporting of major equipment counts consistent with the
proposed emission factors in 40 CFR 98.236(r). We are seeking comment
on the development of population count emission factors based on major
equipment. We are also seeking comment on the proposed use of the
Rutherford et al. (2021) study data instead of using study data from
Zimmerle et al. (2020) and/or Pacsi et al. (2019) to provide the
population count emission factors by major equipment, and the rationale
supporting the use of the respective study data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\107\ Bootstrapping is a type of resampling where a known
dataset is repeatedly drawn from, with replacement, to generate a
sample distribution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Natural Gas Distribution Emission Factors
Natural gas distribution companies currently quantify the emissions
from equipment leaks from pipeline mains and services, below grade
transmission distribution transfer stations, and below grade metering-
regulating stations following the procedures in 40 CFR 98.233(r). This
method uses the count of equipment, subpart W population emission
factors in existing Table W-7 (proposed Table W-5 in this proposal),
and operating time to estimate emissions. The population emission
factors for distribution mains and services in existing Table W-7
(proposed Table W-5) are based on information from the 1996 GRI/EPA
study.\108\ Specifically for plastic mains, additional data are sourced
from a 2005 ICF analysis.\109\ The population emission factors for
distribution mains are published per mile of main by pipeline material
and emission factors for distribution services are published per
service by pipeline material. The population emission factors for below
grade stations in existing Table W-7 (proposed Table W-5) are based on
information from the 1996 GRI/EPA study.\110\ The population emission
factors for below grade transmission-distribution transfer stations and
below grade metering-regulating stations are currently specified in the
existing Table W-7 per station by three inlet pressure categories (>300
pounds per square inch gauge (psig), 100-300 psig, < 100 psig).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\108\ GRI/EPA. Methane Emissions from the Natural Gas Industry,
Volume 9: Underground Pipelines. Prepared for Gas Research Institute
and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Risk Management
Research Laboratory by L.M. Campbell, M.V. Campbell, and D.L.
Epperson, Radian International LLC. GRI-94/0257.2b, EPA-600/R-96-
080i. June 1996. Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
\109\ ICF. Fugitive Emissions from Plastic Pipe, Memorandum from
H. Mallya and Z. Schaffer, ICF Consulting to L. Hanle and E.
Scheehle, EPA. June 30, 2005. Available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
\110\ GRI/EPA. Methane Emissions from the Natural Gas Industry,
Volume 10: Metering and Pressure Regulating Stations in Natural Gas
Transmission and Distribution. Prepared for Gas Research Institute
and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Risk Management
Research Laboratory by L.M. Campbell and B.E. Stapper, Radian
International LLC. GRI-94/0257.27, EPA-600/R-96-080j. June 1996.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this rulemaking, the EPA is proposing to update the population
emission factors in existing Table W-7 (proposed Table W-5) to subpart
W using the results of studies and information that were not available
when the rule was finalized in 2010. Notably, the EPA reviewed recent
studies and updated the emission factors for several natural gas
distribution sources, including pipeline mains and services and below
grade stations, for the 2016 U.S. GHG Inventory.\111\ The majority of
the U.S. GHG Inventory updates were based on
[[Page 50352]]
data published by Lamb et al. in 2015.\112\ Since the time that the
2016 U.S. GHG Inventory updates were made, additional studies for
pipeline distribution mains have been published and reviewed by the
EPA, notably Weller et al. in 2020.\113\ Our assessment of the studies
published since subpart W was finalized supports revising the emission
factors for pipelines in the Natural Gas Distribution industry segment
of subpart W.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\111\ U.S. EPA. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and
Sinks 1990-2014: Revisions to Natural Gas Distribution Emissions.
April 2016. Available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-08/documents/final_revision_ng_distribution_emissions_2016-04-14.pdf and in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2023-0234.
\112\ Lamb, B.K. et al. ``Direct Measurements Show Decreasing
Methane Emissions from Natural Gas Local Distribution Systems in the
United States.'' Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 5161-5169.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2023-0234.
\113\ Weller, Z.D.; Hamburg, S.P.; and Von Fischer, J.C. 2020.
``A National Estimate of Methane Leakage from Pipeline Mains in
Natural Gas Local Distribution Systems.'' Environ. Sci. Technol.
2020, 54(1), 8958. Available in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The population emission factors for distribution mains and services
are a function of the average measured leak rate (in standard cubic
feet per hour) and the frequency of annual leaks observed (leaks/mile-
year or leaks/service-year) by pipeline material (e.g., protected
steel, plastic). The Lamb et al. and Weller et al. studies utilized
different approaches for quantifying leak rates and determining the
pipeline material-specific frequency of annual leaks. The Lamb et al.
study quantified leaks from distribution mains and services using a
high volume sampling method and some downwind tracer measurements and
estimated the frequency of leaks by pipeline material using company
records and Department of Transportation (DOT) repaired leak records
from six local distribution companies (LDCs). This methodology was
consistent with the 1996 GRI/EPA study. The Weller et al. study
quantified leaks from only distribution mains using the AMLD technique,
which involves mobile surveying using high sensitivity instruments and
algorithms that predict the leak location and size, attributed leaks to
the pipeline material using geographic information system (GIS) data,
and estimated the frequency of leaks using modeling.
In the 2022 Proposed Rule, we proposed to revise the pipeline main
equipment leak emission factors using a combination of data from Lamb
et al. (2015) and Weller et al. (2020). We sought comment on the
approach of combining data from these two studies. We received numerous
comments regarding the classification of pipeline materials and
respective quantified leaks in the Weller et al. (2020) study. In
response to these comments and as discussed in more detail below, we
agree with commenters that the categorization of pipeline leaks by
material type likely resulted in inaccuracies specifically for the
unprotected and protected steel pipeline material types. In this
rulemaking, we are continuing to propose revisions of the equipment
leak pipeline main emission factors using more recent study data, but
instead of combining data from Lamb et al. (2015) and Weller et al.
(2020), we are proposing to rely only on the Lamb et al. (2015) study.
In subpart W, there are currently four categories of pipeline
mains: unprotected steel, protected steel, plastic, and cast iron. The
steel categories are differentiated by the presence of cathodic
protection, and, as evidenced by the 1996 GRI/EPA study and Lamb et al.
study data, unprotected steel pipelines are considered to be more leak
prone than cathodically protected steel pipelines. In the Weller et al.
study, the categories of pipeline mains include bare (unprotected)
steel, coated (protected) steel, cast iron, and plastic. We note that
steel pipelines can be protected by cathodic protection and/or coating,
and in the Weller et al. study, cathodically unprotected yet coated
steel pipeline mains appear to have been grouped with cathodically
protected steel pipeline mains. Using the unprotected and protected
steel classifications in the Weller et al. study would thus result in
emission factors for protected steel that are higher than for
unprotected steel, which would conflict with other study data (e.g.,
1996 GRI/EPA, Lamb et al.) as well as voluntary emissions reductions
programs (e.g., EPA Natural Gas STAR). The pipeline categories in the
Weller et al. study do not provide the necessary differentiation to
properly update the emission factors for unprotected (i.e., not
cathodically protected) steel and cathodically protected steel pipeline
mains. For more information on the review and analysis of the Lamb et
al. and Weller et al. studies, see the subpart W TSD, available in the
docket for this rulemaking (Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234).
In consideration of our review and analysis of recent study data
relative to natural gas pipeline mains and services, and consistent
with the emission factors used in the 2016 U.S. GHG Inventory, we are
proposing to provide emission factors for distribution pipeline mains
and services based on the Lamb et al. study leak rates and the 1996
GRI/EPA study leak incidence data. For more information on the
derivation of the proposed emission factors, see the subpart W TSD,
available in the docket for this rulemaking (Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2023-0234).
We are also seeking comments on alternative methods for quantifying
and reporting emissions from distribution mains and services. For
distribution mains and services, we are seeking comments on the use of
direct measurement as well as application of a leaker emission factor
approach. For the use of direct measurement, we are seeking comment on
whether facilities should be permitted to develop facility-specific
distribution main and service emission factors for each type of
pipeline material based on direct measurements and if so, what the
appropriate number of measurements should be for determining a
representative emission factor for each pipeline material including
supporting rationale. For facility-specific emission factors based on
direct measurement, we are seeking comment on the development of both
leaker emission factors and population emission factors. We are seeking
comment on what quantification techniques are best suited for measuring
emissions from distribution pipeline leaks and whether these techniques
require digging down to the pipeline in order to quantify emissions and
also verify pipeline characteristics. For a leaker emission factor
approach, we are specifically interested in what survey techniques are
appropriate and why, including supporting information on specific
instruments and their detection capabilities and whether certain
methods are more suitable for the survey of distribution pipeline leaks
than others. We are seeking comment on the scope and frequency of leak
detection surveys for distribution pipelines and whether annual surveys
of the entire pipeline system or a reduced frequency of survey (i.e.,
partial surveys over a multi-year survey cycle in which the entire
system is surveyed during the survey cycle and approximately equal
portions of the system are surveyed each year of the multi-year survey
cycle) is more appropriate and why. Finally, we are seeking comment on
application of a leaker emission factor approach using default factors
(i.e., not facility specific based on direct measurement) and available
data that could be used in the development of default leaker emission
factors for distribution mains and services.
For below grade stations, the 2016 U.S. GHG Inventory also began
applying a new emission factor from the data published by Lamb et al.
to the count of stations to estimate emissions from these sources. In
order to assess the
[[Page 50353]]
appropriateness of incorporating this revision into the subpart W
requirements for below grade stations (i.e., replacing the set of below
grade emission factors by station type and inlet pressure with one
single emission factor), the EPA performed an analysis of the reported
subpart W data for below grade stations compared to data from the
recent studies (see the subpart W TSD, available in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234). We found that the
subpart W reported station count combined with the current subpart W
emission factors yields an average emission factor similar to the U.S.
GHG Inventory emission factor; as such, using either set of emission
factors would yield approximately the same emissions results for the
GHGRP.
Therefore, we are proposing to amend the emission factors for below
grade transmission-distribution transfer stations and below grade
metering-regulating stations in existing Table W-7 (proposed Table W-5)
to a single emission factor without regard to inlet pressure. We are
also proposing to amend the corresponding section header in existing
Table W-7 (proposed Table W-5) for below grade station emission factors
and the references to existing Table W-7 (proposed Table W-5) in 40 CFR
98.233(r)(6)(i) to clarify the emission factor that should be applied
to both types of below grade stations (i.e., transmission-distribution
transfer and metering-regulating). This proposed amendment would impact
the reporting requirements in 40 CFR 98.236(r) as well, as it would
consolidate six emission source types to two emission source types
(below grade transmission-distribution transfer stations and below
grade metering-regulating stations, without differentiating between
inlet pressures) for purposes of reporting under 40 CFR 98.236(r)(1).
This proposed amendment would improve the data quality through use of
more recent emission factors and would be consistent with changes made
to the U.S. GHG Inventory. It would also result in reporting of fewer
data elements, consistent with section II.C of this preamble.
3. Gathering Pipeline Emission Factors
Facilities in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and
Boosting industry segment currently quantify the emissions from
equipment leaks from gathering pipelines following the procedures in 40
CFR 98.233(r). This method uses the count of equipment, subpart W
population emission factors in existing Table W-1A, and operating time
to estimate emissions. The population emission factors for gathering
pipeline mains in existing Table W-1A are based on leak rates from
natural gas distribution companies and gathering pipeline-specific
activity data as provided in the 1996 GRI/EPA study.\114\ The
population emission factors for gathering pipelines are published per
mile by pipeline material.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\114\ GRI/EPA. Methane Emissions from the Natural Gas Industry,
Volume 9: Underground Pipelines. Prepared for Gas Research Institute
and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Risk Management
Research Laboratory by L.M. Campbell, M.V. Campbell, and D.L.
Epperson, Radian International LLC. GRI-94/0257.2b, EPA-600/R-96-
080i. June 1996. Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA is aware of a recent study that characterized emissions
from gathering pipelines and could potentially be used to develop
population emission factors, Yu et al. (2022).\115\ The Yu et al.
(2022) study used measurements acquired over four aerial campaigns of
the Midland and Delaware sub-basins in the Permian basin. The resulting
emission rate provides a basin-level population emission factor
(megagrams CH4 per kilometer-year). The EPA is not proposing
to use this data in subpart W for the development of gathering pipeline
emission factors because it does not specify the pipeline material
type, as the current subpart W and proposed subpart W emission factors
do. The material-specific emission factors more readily allow operators
to track and quantify emission reductions from pipeline replacement
projects (e.g., replacing more leak prone pipeline materials such as
cast iron with less leak prone materials such as plastic). The
resulting emission factors from Yu et al. rely on emission estimation
techniques that have a lower degree of sensitivity than ground-based
measurements. In order to overcome this limitation, the study authors
performed sensitivity analyses to account for below detection limit
leaks. The major finding of this study is that gathering pipelines have
highly skewed emissions data distribution with very large leaks that
only occur every few hundred miles. Finally, our assessment is that
this study is geographically limited and are concerned that an emission
factor derived with these study data may not be nationally
representative. Additional discussion of the Yu et al. study, including
population emission factors developed using study data as they compare
to subpart W, is included in the subpart W TSD, available in the docket
for this rulemaking (Docket Id. No. v). We are seeking comment on the
EPA's decision not to use the Yu et al. study data in developing
proposed population emission factors, including rationale supporting
the EPA's decision or rationale for why this study should be used in
developing proposed population emission factors. Additionally, we are
seeking comments on whether there are other published studies the EPA
should evaluate for potential use in developing revised emission
factors for gathering pipelines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\115\ Yu, J. et al. ``Methane Emissions from Natural Gas
Gathering Pipelines in the Permian Basin.'' Environ. Sci. Technol.
Lett. 2022, 9, 969-974. Available in the docket for this rulemaking,
Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As noted previously in this section, the EPA is proposing to update
the natural gas distribution population emission factors in existing
Table W-7 (proposed Table W-5) to subpart W using the results of
studies and information that were not available when the rule was
originally finalized. In particular, the EPA is proposing to update the
leak rate portion of the emission factor based on data published by
Lamb et al. in 2015.\116\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\116\ Lamb, B.K. et al. ``Direct Measurements Show Decreasing
Methane Emissions from Natural Gas Local Distribution Systems in the
United States.'' Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 5161-5169.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA has reviewed the recent studies published for Onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting facilities including
the previously discussed Yu et al. study, as well as the additional
studies for pipeline distribution mains, and concluded none of the
studies provide new emissions data or activity data specific to
gathering pipelines suitable to update the existing emission factors.
Therefore, consistent with the updates to the emission factors for
distribution mains, and consistent with section II.B of this preamble,
we are proposing to revise the gathering pipeline population emission
factors in proposed Table W-1 to use the leak rates from Lamb et al.
(2015). We are not proposing to update the activity data (leaks per
mile of pipeline) portion of the emission factors, as the information
in the 1996 GRI/EPA study continues to be the best available data
specific to gathering pipelines. For more information on the proposed
updates to the gathering pipeline population emission factors, see the
subpart W TSD, available in the docket for this rulemaking (Docket Id.
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234).
We are also seeking comments on alternative methods for quantifying
and reporting emissions from gathering pipelines. We are seeking
comments on the use of direct measurement as well as
[[Page 50354]]
application of a leaker emission factor approach. For the use of direct
measurement, we are seeking comment on whether facilities should be
permitted to develop facility-specific emission factors for each type
of pipeline material based on direct measurements and if so, what the
appropriate number of measurements should be for determining a
representative emission factor for each pipeline material including
supporting rationale. For facility-specific emission factors based on
direct measurement, we are seeking comment on the development of both
leaker emission factors and population emission factors. We are seeking
comment on what quantification techniques are best suited for measuring
emissions from gathering pipeline leaks and whether these techniques
require digging down to the pipeline in order to quantify emissions and
also verify pipeline characteristics. For a leaker emission factor
approach, we are specifically interested in what survey techniques are
appropriate and why, including supporting information on specific
instruments and their detection capabilities and whether certain
methods are more suitable for the survey of gathering pipeline leaks
than others. We are seeking comment on the scope and frequency of leak
detection surveys for gathering pipelines and whether annual surveys of
the entire pipeline system or a reduced frequency of survey (i.e.,
partial surveys over a multi-year survey cycle in which the entire
system is surveyed during the survey cycle and approximately equal
portions of the system are surveyed each year of the multi-year survey
cycle) is more appropriate and why. Finally, we are seeking comment on
application of a leaker emission factor approach using default factors
(i.e., not facility specific based on direct measurement) and available
data that could be used in the development of default leaker emission
factors for gathering pipelines.
R. Offshore Production
Currently, subpart W requires offshore production facilities to
report emissions consistent with the methods published by the U.S.
Department of Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM). Since
subpart W was first promulgated, there have been a number of updates to
the BOEM requirements and how BOEM implements the requirements (e.g.,
the development of their Outer Continental Shelf Air Quality System
(OCS AQS) \117\), and the EPA is proposing to amend subpart W to
reflect those changes. Specifically, the EPA is proposing to update
outdated acronym ``BOEMRE'' to the current acronym ``BOEM'' in 40 CFR
98.232(b), 40 CFR 98.233(s), and 40 CFR 98.236(s); to update the cross
references to the BOEM requirements from ``30 CFR 250.302 through 304''
to ``30 CFR 550.302 through 304'' in 40 CFR 98.232(b), 40 CFR
98.233(s), and the introductory paragraph of 40 CFR 98.234; and to
remove the outdated references to ``GOADS'' from 40 CFR 98.233(s). The
EPA is also proposing to adjust some of the language in 40 CFR
98.232(b) and 40 CFR 98.233(s) to more accurately reflect the current
BOEM program and requirements (e.g., adjusting the number of years
between BOEM data collection efforts from 4 to 3 years, referring to
published data and data submitted to BOEM rather than an emissions
study).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\117\ For more information on this system and the emissions
inventories collected by the system, see https://www.boem.gov/environment/environmental-studies/ocs-emissions-inventories.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emissions data are collected by BOEM every few years. In years that
coincide with a year in which BOEM collects data, offshore production
facilities that report emissions inventory data to BOEM report the same
annual emissions to subpart W as calculated and reported to BOEM
(existing 40 CFR 98.233(s)(1)) and facilities that do not report
emissions inventory data to BOEM must use the most recent monitoring
and calculation methods published by BOEM (existing 40 CFR
98.233(s)(2)). In the intervening years, reporters currently are
required to adjust emissions based on the operating time for the
facility in the current reporting year relative to the operating time
in the most recent BOEM data submission or BOEM emissions study
publication year. The EPA is proposing two revisions for these
intervening years. First the EPA is proposing to require reporters to
report two new data elements in these years, the facility's operating
hours in the current year and the facility's operating hours from the
BOEM emission study publication year that is the basis for the reported
emissions. This information would improve verification, consistent with
section II.C of this preamble. Second, as an alternative to the current
adjustment using operating hours in years that do not overlap with the
most recent BOEM data submission or BOEM emissions study publication
year, as applicable, the EPA is also proposing to allow reporters to
calculate emissions using the most recent monitoring and calculation
methods published by BOEM referenced in 30 CFR 550.302 through 304
(implemented through the OCS AQS). This alternative is expected to
improve data quality through the use of more empirical data, consistent
with section II.B of this preamble.
Finally, to better align the emissions reported by offshore
production facilities between BOEM's Outer Continental Shelf Emissions
Inventory and the GHGRP, the EPA is proposing that offshore production
facilities report the BOEM Facility IDs that constitute the GHGRP
facility. Having a definitive point of reference between the two
datasets would allow the EPA to better verify the emissions reported to
the GHGRP.
S. Combustion Equipment
1. Clarifications of Calculation Methodology Applicability
All facilities reporting under subpart W except those in the
Onshore Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline industry segment must include
combustion emissions in their annual report. Facilities in the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production, Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting, and Natural Gas Distribution industry segments
calculate emissions in accordance with the provisions in 40 CFR
98.233(z) and report combustion emissions per 40 CFR 98.236(z).
Reporters in the other industry segments calculate and report
combustion emissions under subpart C (General Stationary Fuel
Combustion Sources). Subpart W refers reporters in these segments to
the calculation methodologies in subpart C to determine combustion
emissions for certain fuels. Specifically, 40 CFR 98.233(z)(1)
specifies that reporters may use any tier of subpart C if the fuel
combusted is listed in Table C-1; the paragraph further specifies that
the subpart C methodologies may only be used for fuel meeting the
definition of ``natural gas'' in 40 CFR 98.238 if it is also of
pipeline quality specification and has a minimum HHV of 950 British
thermal units per standard cubic foot (Btu/scf). If the fuel is natural
gas that does not meet these criteria, field gas, process vent gas, or
a blend containing field gas or process vent gas, 40 CFR 98.233(z)(1)
specifies that the procedures in 40 CFR 98.233(z)(2) should be used to
calculate combustion emissions.
Certain stakeholders have identified several concerns with these
requirements. In general, these stakeholders have stated that the
ability to use subpart C calculation methodologies is too restrictive,
and some of their feedback also indicates
[[Page 50355]]
they may have been misinterpreting some of the provisions. We are
proposing several amendments to these provisions to address these
concerns, which would improve the accuracy of the emissions calculated
and therefore the quality of data collected, consistent with section
II.B of this preamble.
First, a stakeholder indicated that some member companies have been
interpreting the existing provisions of 40 CFR 98.233(z)(1)(ii) that
require emissions to be reported according to 40 CFR 98.236(z) and not
subpart C to mean that reporters with combustion sources at onshore
petroleum and natural gas production facilities, at onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting facilities, and at natural gas
distribution facilities must use the calculation methodologies in
subpart W for all fuel types rather than subpart C (even given the
provisions in 40 CFR 98.233(z)(1) that reference subpart C for certain
fuels).\118\ The existing provisions of 40 CFR 98.233(z)(1)(ii) are
intended to refer only to the reporting requirements and are not
intended to define which calculation methodologies can be used. In the
existing rule, the provisions in the 40 CFR 98.233(z)(1) introductory
text define which calculation methodologies can be used, and 40 CFR
98.233(z)(1)(ii) simply indicates that all reporters with combustion
sources at onshore petroleum and natural gas production facilities, at
onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting facilities,
and at natural gas distribution facilities must report those emissions
in the e-GGRT system under subpart W rather than under subpart C. As
part of the amendments described in this section, consistent with
section II.D of this preamble, 40 CFR 98.233(z)(1)(ii) is proposed to
be moved to 40 CFR 98.233(z)(5), and we are proposing wording changes
to highlight that this paragraph refers only to the requirement to
report combustion emissions under subpart W and does not preclude
reporters from using subpart C methods to calculate emissions if they
qualify to do so under proposed 40 CFR 98.233(z)(1) (and proposed 40
CFR 98.233(z)(2), as described later in this section. We are also
proposing to add a reference to this new proposed paragraph 40 CFR
98.233(z)(5) in both proposed 40 CFR 98.233(z)(1)(ii) and proposed
98.233(z)(2)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\118\ Letter from GPA Midstream Association to Mark de
Figueiredo, U.S. EPA, providing information in response to EPA
questions during the meeting on March 23, 2016. May 18, 2016.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, a stakeholder has asked for EPA guidance regarding whether
field gas that is of pipeline quality meets the criteria to use the
subpart C methodologies under the existing 40 CFR 98.233(z)(1),\119\
and the stakeholder noted that ``field gas'' is not defined within
existing subpart W or subpart A (General Provisions). The terms ``field
gas'' and ``field quality'' are frequently used interchangeably by the
industry, but the EPA also recognizes that some streams in the Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry segment that
industry would generally call ``field gas'' can be natural gas (as
defined in 40 CFR 98.238) of pipeline quality with a minimum HHV of 950
Btu/scf. After consideration of these concerns, the EPA is proposing to
revise 40 CFR 98.233(z)(1) to remove the references to field gas and
process vent gas and include only the characteristics for the fuels
that can use subpart C methodologies. The EPA's intent is to indicate
that a stream colloquially referred to as ``field gas'' that otherwise
meets the three criteria to use the subpart C methodologies for
combustion emissions (i.e., (1) meets the definition of ``natural gas''
in 40 CFR 98.238; (2) is of pipeline quality specification; and (3) has
a minimum HHV of 950 Btu/scf) may use subpart C methodologies. The EPA
is also proposing conforming edits to existing 40 CFR 98.233(z)(2)
(proposed 40 CFR 98.233(z)(3) in this proposed rule) for consistency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\119\ Letter from GPA Midstream Association to Mark de
Figueiredo, U.S. EPA, providing information in response to EPA
questions during the meeting on March 23, 2016. May 18, 2016.
Available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Third, certain reporters have indicated in questions submitted to
the GHGRP Help Desk that the term ``pipeline quality'' is used in
existing 40 CFR 98.233(z)(1) but it is not defined in subpart W. In
addition, a stakeholder has opined that the emissions calculated using
subpart C and subpart W calculation methodologies are similar for many
fuel streams that are not natural gas of pipeline quality specification
with a minimum HHV of 950 Btu/scf. Therefore, the stakeholder suggested
that the EPA should allow subpart C calculation methodologies to be
used for a wider variety of fuels (if not all fuels in the segments
that report combustion emissions under subpart W).\120\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\120\ See Letter from GPA Midstream Association to Mark de
Figueiredo, U.S. EPA, providing information in response to EPA
questions during the meeting on March 23, 2016. May 18, 2016. See
also Letter from Matt Hite, GPA Midstream Association, to Mark de
Figueiredo, U.S. EPA, Re: Additional Information on Suggested Part
98, Subpart W Rule Revisions to Reduce Burden. September 13, 2019.
Both letters are available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have reviewed this stakeholder's analysis and conducted our own
analysis of additional hypothetical fuel compositions. In general, we
observed that the agreement of emissions as calculated using subpart C
calculation methodologies for natural gas and using subpart W
calculation methodologies varies based on the composition, with the
largest differences resulting for fuel streams with high CO2
content. We also observed that for these fuels, emissions calculated
using subpart W calculation methodologies generally showed better
agreement with emissions calculated using the subpart C calculation
methodology for natural gas when using a site-specific HHV (Tier 2)
than with emissions calculated using the subpart C calculation
methodology that uses a default HHV (Tier 1). For more information on
our fuel composition analysis and the comparison of emissions using
various composition thresholds, see the subpart W TSD, available in the
docket for this rulemaking (Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234).
Based on our analysis, we are proposing to add numeric composition
thresholds for natural gas to a new proposed paragraph in 40 CFR
98.233(z)(2) that define the fuels for which an owner or operator may
use subpart C methodologies. In particular, we are proposing that
subpart C methodologies Tier 2 or higher may be used for fuel meeting
the definition of ``natural gas'' in 40 CFR 98.238 if it has a minimum
HHV of 950 Btu/scf, a maximum CO2 content of 1 percent by
volume, and a minimum CH4 content of 85 percent by volume. We are not
proposing to amend the existing provisions in 40 CFR 98.233(z)(1) that
allow the use of any subpart C calculation methodology for natural gas
of pipeline quality specification with a minimum HHV of 950 Btu/scf
(other than the proposed clarifications noted earlier in this section).
We are also proposing to move the existing provisions for fuels that do
not meet the specifications to use subpart C methodologies from 40 CFR
98.233(z)(2) to a new proposed paragraph 40 CFR 98.233(z)(3). This
proposed amendment would allow reporters to use subpart C methodologies
for a wider variety of fuel streams while still ensuring data quality.
We request comment on the natural gas specifications included in
proposed 40 CFR 98.233(z)(2), including the values proposed for the
maximum
[[Page 50356]]
CO2 content and minimum CH4 content, as well as
whether additional specification criteria should be included (e.g., a
maximum HHV).
2. Methane Slip from Internal Combustion Equipment
The authors of several recent studies have examined combustion
emissions at Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
facilities and have demonstrated that a significant portion of
emissions can result from unburned CH4 entrained in the
exhaust of natural gas compressor engines (also referred to as
``combustion slip'' or ``methane slip''). These studies contend that
emissions from natural gas compressor engines included in the GHGRP are
significantly underestimated because they do not account for combustion
slip.\121\ The EPA performed a review of each of these studies and the
U.S. GHG Inventory to determine whether and how combustion slip
emissions have been incorporated into published data and how the
incorporation of combustion slip would affect the emissions from the
petroleum and natural gas system sector reported to the GHGRP (see the
subpart W TSD, available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id.
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\121\ Zimmerle et al., Characterization of Methane Emissions
from Gathering Compressor Stations: Final Report (October 2019
Revision) and Vaughn et al., ``Methane Exhaust Measurements at
Gathering Compressor Stations in the United States,'' Environmental
Science & Technology. 2021, 55 (2), 1190-1196, both available in the
docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the 2022 Proposed Rule, we proposed methods to quantify and
report combustion slip in subpart C and subpart W from compressor
drivers for all subpart W industry segments that currently report
combustion emissions in subpart C or subpart W. The emission estimation
methods provided in the 2022 Proposed Rule were the use of default
emission factors or default combustion efficiencies for compressor
drivers based on recent study data. We received comments on the 2022
Proposed Rule requesting methods to quantify combustion slip using
original equipment manufacturer (OEM) data and direct measurement. We
also received comments that while compressor drivers likely represent
the largest number of reciprocating engines in service at petroleum and
natural gas facilities, there are reciprocating engines that do not
drive compressors and other engine types (e.g., GT) that emit
CH4 from combustion slip. We have performed additional
review of the combustion slip emission source type as detailed below.
In this rulemaking, we are continuing to propose the quantification and
reporting of combustion slip from subpart W facilities that currently
report combustion emissions in subpart C or subpart W. However, in
consideration of the comments received on the 2022 Proposed Rule and
the directives under CAA 136(h), we are broadening the applicability of
the combustion slip quantification and reporting methods to all RICE
and GT and additionally providing three methods for quantifying slip
including default emission factors or combustion efficiencies, OEM
data, or direct measurement. We are also proposing some revisions to
the 2022 Proposed Rule for the reporting of combustion emissions for
RICE and GT for subpart W facilities that report their combustion
emissions to subpart C after performing a more detailed review of the
subpart C e-GGRT combined unit reporting configurations.
Based on the EPA's review and analysis, there appears to be
combustion slip for RICE and GT, which are used primarily to drive
compressors, at oil and gas facilities. In addition, while the recent
studies are focused on the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering
and Boosting industry segment, the EPA's literature review found the
presence of combustion slip in different industry segments, so it
appears that combustion slip is dependent on the type of internal
combustion equipment and not the application (i.e., we expect
combustion slip from RICE or GT regardless of the industry segment). We
also considered that other EPA programs such as AP-42: Compilation of
Air Pollutant Emissions Factors; 40 CFR part 60, subpart JJJJ; and 40
CFR part 63, subpart ZZZZ consider emissions from internal combustion
equipment (i.e., RICE or GT) irrespective of their use to drive a
compressor or the industry segment in which the engine operates.
Therefore, consistent with section II.A of this preamble, we are
proposing to revise the methodologies for determining combustion
emissions from RICE and GT, including those that drive compressors, to
account for combustion slip. For the three subpart W industry segments
reporting combustion emissions to subpart W (Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production, Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and
Boosting, and Natural Gas Distribution), we are proposing that RICE and
GT combusting natural gas that qualify to determine emissions using the
subpart C calculation methodologies per 40 CFR 98.233(z)(1) and
proposed new 98.233(z)(2),\122\ would have three options in proposed 40
CFR 98.233(z)(4) to quantify emissions from combustion slip, including
direct measurement using a performance test, the use of OEM data, or
the use of default emission factors. For facilities that conduct a
performance test to calculate combustion slip, we are proposing in 40
CFR 98.233(z)(4)(i) that the performance test would be required one
time, in accordance with one of the test methods in proposed 40 CFR
98.234(i), which include EPA Methods 18 and 320 as well as an alternate
method, ASTM D6348-12. If a facility is required to or elects to
conduct a performance test for any reason, we are proposing that they
must use the results of the test for estimating emissions. The results
of the performance test would be used to develop an emission factor for
use in the emissions calculations for CH4. For facilities
electing to use OEM data, which may include manufacturer specification
sheets, emissions certification data, or other manufacturer data
providing expected emission rates from the RICE or GT, we are proposing
that the reporter would use the OEM data to develop an emission factor
for use in their emissions calculations for CH4. Concerning
OEM data, we are seeking comment on whether OEM data is expected to be
representative of field conditions. Further, we are considering
proposing requirements for the OEM supplied data including defining a
standardized testing program for engine families similar to those that
underly the emissions certification process for the engine NSPS in 40
CFR part 60 subparts IIII and JJJJ (e.g., Parts 1054 and 1065). These
programs define the number of engines in a family that are required to
be tested as a number (e.g., 30) or a percentage of engines produced in
a year. The programs also define the methods for testing the engines
(including engine load, test duration, etc.) as well as deterioration
factors for adjusting for the degradation of performance that is
expected over time. Alternatively, we are considering that
manufacturers perform the same type of testing incorporated in proposed
40 CFR 98.234(i) for a certain number of engines in an engine family.
We are seeking comments on these considerations including how the
manufacturer testing program should be structured and more
specifically: how many engines should be tested in an engine family;
under
[[Page 50357]]
what load(s) should the engines be tested; what testing methods should
be used; what is the appropriate duration of the test; and whether a
deterioration factor be included to account for degradation of
performance over time. We are also considering whether to add reporting
requirements for the results of performance tests conducted by
manufacturers. Finally, for facilities electing to the use the default
emission factors, which were developed using data from Zimmerle et al.
(2019), we are proposing that the reporter would be required to select
the appropriate emission factor by equipment type (e.g., 2-stroke lean-
burn, 4-stroke lean-burn, 4-stroke rich-burn, or GT) in proposed new
Table W-7 rather than the emission factors in Table C-2 for use in
their emissions calculations for CH4. The precise derivation
of the proposed emission factors is discussed in more detail in the
subpart W TSD, available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id.
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\122\ See section III.S.1 of this preamble for information on
the proposed amendments to 40 CFR 98.233(z) to increase the
flexibility for reporters to use the subpart C calculation
methodologies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the three subpart W industry segments reporting combustion
emissions to subpart W (Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production,
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting, and Natural
Gas Distribution), we are proposing a default equipment specific
combustion efficiency (proposed to be provided in equations W-39A and
W-39B) for RICE and GT that must be used to determine emissions using
the subpart W calculation methodologies per existing 40 CFR
98.233(z)(2) (proposed 40 CFR 98.233(z)(3)). The default combustion
efficiency would account for methane slip, and be combined with fuel
composition to calculate emissions. We are not proposing to provide
options for reporters to conduct performance tests or use OEM data for
such RICE and GT. The fuel types covered by the methods in existing 40
CFR 98.233(z)(2) (proposed 40 CFR 98.233(z)(3)) are expected to be
highly variable in composition over the course of the year, such that a
one-time performance test or OEM data are not expected to be
representative of the annual emissions.
We expect that the records necessary to confirm the value for the
development of an emission factor based on the results of a performance
test or OEM data are already required to be maintained by the facility
per 40 CFR 98.237; thus, no new recordkeeping provisions relative to
the combustion slip amendments are being proposed. We are proposing to
add new reporting requirements to 40 CFR 98.236(z)(2) specifically for
internal combustion engines that combust natural gas that meets the
criteria of proposed 40 CFR 98.233(z)(1) or (2) to specify the
equipment type of reported internal combustion units, the method used
to estimate the CH4 emission factor, and the value of the
emission factor to facilitate verification of the reported emissions.
Under the existing reporting structure, facilities can group internal
combustion engines by the unit type and the fuel type. The proposed
amendments would require further disaggregation of the reporting of
natural gas-fired internal combustion engine and GT CH4
emissions as units grouped for reporting must share the same equipment
type (e.g., 4-stroke rich burn), fuel type, and method for determining
the CH4 emission factor, which will allow the EPA to
adequately verify the data.
For the subpart W industry segments that estimate and report their
combustion emissions to subpart C, we are proposing amendments in
subpart C analogous to the proposed amendments described in this
section for the three industry segments that estimate and report their
combustion emissions to subpart W (i.e., Onshore Petroleum and Natural
Gas Production, Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and
Boosting, and Natural Gas Distribution). Specifically, the facilities
that report their combustion emissions to subpart C and currently use
either equation C-8, C-8a, C-8b, C-9, C-9a, or C-10 in 40 CFR 98.33(c),
as it corresponds to the Tier methodology selected to estimate their
CO2 emissions, to estimate CH4 emissions. These
equations rely on the use of a default CH4 emission factor
from Table C-2 to estimate emissions. We are proposing to require that
natural gas-fired RICE or GT located at these facilities would be
required to use one of the options in proposed 40 CFR 98.233(z)(4) to
estimate CH4 emissions. Specifically, we are proposing to
revise the ``EF'' term in each of the equations in 40 CFR 98.33(c)
(i.e., equations C-8, C-8a, C-8b, C-9a, C-9b, and C-10) to reference
the options for developing a CH4 emission factor in proposed
40 CFR 98.233(z)(4) for natural gas-fired RICE or GT. We are also
proposing to add a footnote to Table C-2 that specifies that for
reporters subject to subpart W, the default CH4 emission
factor in Table C-2 for natural gas may only be used for natural gas-
fired combustion units that are not RICE or GT. Finally, we are
proposing to amend 40 CFR 98.36(b), (c)(1), and (c)(3) specifically for
RICE or GT at facilities that are subject to subpart W. These
provisions currently provide the requirements for reporting by emission
unit, by aggregation of units or by common pipe configurations. Under
the proposed amendments, we are requiring reporters which report
emissions in accordance with 40 CFR 98.36(b), (c)(1), or (c)(3) to
provide the equipment type (e.g., two stroke lean burn RICE), the
method used to determine the CH4 emission factor and the
average value of the CH4 emission factor. This proposed
change would ensure that sufficient data in the overall aggregation of
units or common pipe (i.e., multiple units combusting natural gas) is
reported such that we can perform review of the supplied emission
factor data and perform verification on the corresponding emissions.
Overall, these proposed amendments to the subpart C reporting
requirements are analogous to and consistent with what is being
required for RICE or GT for facilities that report combustion emissions
to subpart W.
3. Higher Heating Value for Calculating N2O
As noted previously, there are subpart W specific methods for
quantifying combustion equipment emissions for facilities that report
their combustion emissions to subpart W in existing 40 CFR 98.233(z)(2)
(proposed (z)(3) in this proposed rule). For quantifying emissions from
N2O specifically, the existing rule specifies the use of
equation W-40. This equation requires the fuel throughput, the HHV of
the fuel, and the use of a default emission factor. For field gas or
process vent gas, the variable definition for the HHV provides that
either a site-specific or default value may be used. We are proposing,
consistent with section II.B of this preamble, to amend the definition
of the variable for the HHV to require the use of a site-specific value
because we believe the site-specific value more accurately accounts for
the more variable fuel compositions that exist in field or process gas.
Our assessment is that the methods for calculating CO2 and
CH4 in 40 CFR 98.233(z)(2)(ii) (proposed (z)(3)(ii) in this
proposed rule) already require the use of site-specific values for the
hydrocarbon streams going to the combustion unit; therefore, we expect
that a site-specific HHV is known (or can be calculated using the
compositional data) without incurring additional burden, while
increasing the accuracy of the emissions estimate.
4. Other Calculation Methodology Clarifications Applicability
To determine the concentrations of hydrocarbon constituents in the
flow of gas to the combustion unit, existing 40
[[Page 50358]]
CFR 98.233(z)(2)(ii) specifies that reporters must either use a
continuous gas composition analyzer (if one is present) or the
procedures specified in 40 CFR 98.233(u)(2). For onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting facilities, 40 CFR 98.233(u)(2)
specifies use of the annual average gas composition based on the most
recent available analysis of the gas received at the facility. However,
one stakeholder has indicated that for fuels using the existing
provisions of 40 CFR 98.233(z)(2) to calculate emissions, the
requirements for determining the gas composition could result in
inaccurate calculations of emissions for some facilities because
onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting facilities do
not necessarily use the gas received at their facility for
combustion.\123\ For example, if the gas received at the facility is
not suitable for combustion, they may mix the gas with purchased
natural gas. In that case, the annual average composition of gas
received at the facility would not be representative of the gas sent to
the combustion unit (as required by existing 40 CFR 98.233(z)(2)),
which could result in inaccurate emissions. Therefore, the EPA is
proposing to revise the language in 40 CFR 98.233(z)(2)(ii) (proposed
40 CFR 98.233(z)(3)(ii)(B) in this proposed rule) to allow the use of
engineering estimates based on best available data to determine the
concentration of gas hydrocarbon constituent in the flow of gas to the
unit. This proposed amendment would allow reporters to use the best
information available to determine the gas composition while
maintaining the option for reporters to use 40 CFR 98.233(u)(2) if they
do not have other stream-specific information. This proposed amendment
is expected to improve the accuracy of the emissions calculated and
therefore the quality of data collected, consistent with section II.B
of this preamble.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\123\ See Letter from GPA Midstream Association to Mark de
Figueiredo, U.S. EPA, providing information in response to EPA
questions during the meeting on March 23, 2016. May 18, 2016. See
also Letter from Matt Hite, GPA Midstream Association, to Mark de
Figueiredo, U.S. EPA, Re: Additional Information on Suggested Part
98, Subpart W Rule Revisions to Reduce Burden. September 13, 2019.
Both letters are available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket
Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are also proposing amendments to clarify that emissions may be
calculated for groups of combustion units. The existing provisions of
40 CFR 98.233(z)(2) (proposed 40 CFR 98.233(z)(3)(ii)) could be
interpreted to specify that emissions must be calculated for each
individual combustion unit. However, because combustion emissions and
activity data are reported as combined totals for each type of
combustion device, fuel type, and method for determining the
CH4 emission factor (for RICE and GT), it is generally not
necessary to calculate emissions for each individual unit before
aggregating the total emissions. For example, if the volume of fuel
combusted is determined at a single location upstream of several
combustion units, emissions may be determined for that combined volume
of fuel (i.e., for that group of combustion units). In other words, it
would not be necessary in this example case to apportion a volume of
fuel to each unit, calculate emissions separately, and then combine
them again. If the combustion units downstream of this shared
measurement point are a mix of combustion device types, the emissions
and the volume of fuel would still need to be apportioned between those
combustion device types for reporting purposes; however, reporters may
elect to perform that apportioning either before or after emissions are
calculated, as appropriate, as long as the group of combustion units
does not include any natural gas internal combustion equipment
including RICE or GT. If any of the combustion units downstream of this
shared measurement point are natural gas-driven internal combustion
equipment including RICE or GT, the volumes of fuel for those units
would have to be separated from the total before emissions are
calculated to account for the differences in combustion efficiency, as
described in section III.S.2 of this preamble. Some of the tiers in
subpart C similarly allow for calculation of emissions by groups of
units combusting the same fuel, so we are proposing to include
analogous language to that in subpart C in 40 CFR 98.233(z)(1)(ii) and
40 CFR 98.233(z)(2)(ii) to provide for these clarifications in how to
calculate.
5. Location of Reporting Requirements for Combustion Equipment
Section 136(h) of the CAA specifies the following concerning
reporting: ``Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this
section, the Administrator shall revise the requirements of subpart W
of part 98 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, to ensure the
reporting under such subpart, and calculation of charges under
subsections (e) and (f) of this section, are based on empirical data,
including data collected pursuant to subsection (a)(4), accurately
reflect the total CH4 emissions and waste emissions from the
applicable facilities, and allow owners and operators of applicable
facilities to submit empirical emissions data, in a manner to be
prescribed by the Administrator, to demonstrate the extent to which a
charge under subsection (c) is owed.'' As noted in this excerpt, the
IRA directs the Administrator to ensure reporting under subpart W
accurately reflects total CH4 emissions from applicable
facilities.
Apart from onshore natural gas transmission pipeline facilities,
all facilities subject to subpart W must include combustion emissions
in their annual report. As noted in section III.S.1 of this preamble,
facilities in the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production, Onshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting, and Natural Gas
Distribution industry segments must calculate combustion emissions in
accordance with 40 CFR 98.233(z) and report emissions under subpart W.
Facilities in the remaining industry segments (i.e., Offshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Production, Onshore Natural Gas Processing, Onshore
Natural Gas Transmission Compression, Underground Natural Gas Storage,
LNG Storage, and LNG Import and Export Equipment) are required to
calculate combustion emissions in accordance with the provisions of 40
CFR 98.33 and report emissions under subpart C.
The EPA is seeking comment on amending subpart W to specify that
all industry segments would be required to report their combustion
emissions, including CH4, under subpart W to more accurately
reflect the total CH4 emissions from such facilities within
the emissions reported under subpart W. Using RY2021 data for
combustion sources, we determined that requiring combustion emissions
from all oil and gas operations to be reported to subpart W rather than
subpart C would increase total subpart W CH4 emissions by
less than 1 percent. If the amendments to combustion slip discussed in
section III.S.2 of this preamble are finalized, the reported
CH4 emissions from combustion are expected to increase, but
we estimate the increase in total CH4 emissions from
combustion devices at facilities subject to subpart W would be less
than 5 percent. Under this approach, we would consider continuing to
allow all the industry segments that currently report combustion
emissions under subpart C (i.e., Offshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production, Onshore Natural Gas Processing, Onshore Natural Gas
Transmission Compression, Underground Natural Gas Storage, LNG Storage,
and LNG Import and Export Equipment) to use the same subpart C
calculation methodologies as they
[[Page 50359]]
currently use in order to minimize the burden on affected facilities.
This amendment, however, would result in changes to their reporting
structure, as subpart W does not currently contain the same methods to
report via a common pipe for fuel streams or by aggregation of units as
provided in subpart C. Instead, for subpart W, combustion emissions are
aggregated by fuel type, combustion equipment type, and if finalized,
by the method used for estimating combustion slip, when applicable.
There are also exclusions for reporting combustion emissions in 40 CFR
98.233(z)(5) and (6), specifically for external combustion equipment
with a rated heat capacity of less than 5 million British thermal units
per hour (MMBtu/hr) and internal combustion equipment with a rated heat
capacity of less than 1 MMBtu/hr. Under this approach, we expect that
these exemptions would apply to the facilities newly subject to subpart
W. Similarly, under this approach, we expect that the exemptions in
subpart C would no longer apply to these facilities. The exemptions
that we expect may impact facilities under this approach are the
subpart C exclusions of reporting emissions from portable and emergency
equipment in 40 CFR 98.30(a) and (b).
T. Leak Detection and Measurement Methods
1. Acoustic Leak Detection
For emission source types for which measurements are required,
subpart W specifies the methods that may be used to make those
measurements in 40 CFR 98.234(a). To improve the quality of the data
when an acoustic leak detection device is used, consistent with section
II.B of this preamble, we are proposing two revisions to the acoustic
measurement requirements in 40 CFR 98.234(a)(5). First, for stethoscope
type acoustic leak detection devices (i.e., those designed to detect
through-valve leakage when put in contact with the valve body and that
provide an audible leak signal but do not calculate a leak rate), we
are proposing that a leak is detected if an audible leak signal is
observed or registered by the device. Second, we are proposing that if
a leak is detected using a stethoscope type device, then that leak must
be measured using one of the quantification methods specified in 40 CFR
98.234(b) through (d) and that leak measurement must be reported
regardless of the volumetric flow rate measured. These proposed
revisions would improve the accuracy of emissions reported for
compressors and transmission tanks when an acoustic leak detection
device is used.
2. High Volume Samplers
We are proposing two revisions to the high volume sampler methods
to improve the quality of the data when high volume samplers are used
for flow measurements, consistent with section II.B of this preamble.
First, we are proposing to add detail to 40 CFR 98.234(d)(3) to clarify
the calculation methods associated with high volume sampler
measurements. Generally, high volume samplers measure CH4
flow, not whole gas flow. However, the current calculation methods in
40 CFR 98.234(d)(3) treat the measurement as a whole gas measurement.
Therefore, we are proposing to clarify the calculation methods needed
if the high volume sampler outputs CH4 flow in either a mass
flow or volumetric flow basis. Specifically, we are proposing methods
to determine natural gas (whole gas) flows based on measured
CH4 flows.
Second, we are proposing to add a paragraph at 40 CFR 98.234(d)(5)
to clarify how to assess the capacity limits of a high volume sampler.
Currently, 40 CFR 98.234(d) simply states to ``Use a high volume
sampler to measure emissions within the capacity of the instrument'';
there is no other information provided to clarify what ``within the
capacity of the instrument'' means or how it is determined. We
understand that there are different manufacturers, but most common high
volume samplers report maximum sampling rates of 10 to 11 cubic feet
per minute (cfm) and maximum CH4 flow quantitation limits of
6 to 8 cfm. Based on our review of reported high volume sampler
measurements, we found that 2 to 5 percent of high volume sampler
measurements for all types of compressor sources (for both centrifugal
and reciprocating compressors) are likely at or beyond the expected
capacity limits of the high volume sampler instrument. Considering
actual sampling rates, gas collection efficiencies near the sampling
rates, and reported CH4 quantitation limits relative to
maximum sampling rates, we determined that whole gas flow rates
exceeding 70 percent of the device's maximum rated sampling rate is an
indication that the device will not accurately quantify the volumetric
emissions, which we deem to exceed the capacity of the device.
Therefore, we are proposing to specify that CH4 flows above
the manufacturer's CH4 flow quantitation limit or total
volumetric flows exceeding 70 percent of the manufacturer's maximum
sampling rate indicate that the flow is beyond the capacity of the
instrument and that flow meters or calibrated bags must be used to
quantify the flow rate. For more information on our review, see the
subpart W TSD, available in the docket for this rulemaking (Docket Id.
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234).
U. Industry Segment-Specific Throughput Quantity Reporting
1. Throughput Information for the Future Implementation of the Waste
Emissions Charge
As noted in section I.E of this preamble, the waste emissions
charge specifies segment-specific thresholds (Waste Emissions
Threshold) for segments subject to the waste emissions charge. For the
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production and Offshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production industry segments, the Waste Emissions Threshold
is specified in CAA section 136(f)(1) as, ``(A) 0.20 percent of the
natural gas sent to sale from such facility;'' or ``(B) 10 metric tons
of methane per million barrels of oil sent to sale from such facility,
if such facility sent no natural gas to sale.'' For the Onshore
Petroleum And Natural Gas Gathering And Boosting, Onshore Natural Gas
Processing, Onshore Natural Gas Transmission Compression, LNG Storage,
LNG Import and Export Equipment, and Onshore Natural Gas Transmission
Pipeline industry segments, the Waste Emissions Threshold is defined in
CAA section 136(f)(2) and (3) as a percentage of ``natural gas sent to
sale from or through such facility,'' with the percentages specified
varying by segment.
To align the subpart W reporting elements with text used in CAA
section 136 and enable verification of throughput-related reporting
elements, consistent with section II.C of this preamble, we are
proposing a combination of new reporting elements and amendments to
existing segment-specific throughput reporting requirements in 40 CFR
98.236(aa).
We are proposing to add the word ``natural'' in front of ``gas'' at
each occurrence where it is used in the throughput reporting elements
in subpart W that are being revised to align with CAA section 136. We
note that the CAA section 136 text uses the term ``oil'' and we are
clarifying in this preamble that for the purposes of subpart W the term
``oil'' has the same meaning as ``crude oil,'' which is used in the
throughput reporting elements in subpart W and defined in subpart A of
part 98.
We are also generally proposing revisions to ensure that the
verbiage of ``sent to sales'' or ``through the facility'' is reflected
in the reporting elements, as
[[Page 50360]]
applicable. We are also proposing in 40 CFR 98.236(aa) that the
quantities sent to sales or through the facility be measured, as it is
reasonable to expect that the quantities of these products are closely
tracked. We request comment on situations in which a reporter may not
be measuring the quantity ``sent to sales'' or ``through the
facility.''
Aside from these overarching proposed amendments, there are
industry segment-specific proposed amendments for the Onshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Production, Offshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Production, Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting,
and Onshore Natural Gas Processing industry segments as described in
the remainder of this section.
a. Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production and Offshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Production
For the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production and Offshore
Petroleum and Natural Gas Production industry segments, the current
requirements for reporting throughputs of crude oil are combined with
volumes of condensate. These volumes will need to be reported
separately in order to align with the CAA section 136(f) oil threshold
for production facilities, when applicable. Therefore, we are proposing
the separation of these reporting elements into two distinct reporting
elements in both 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(1)(i) and 98.236(aa)(2).
For consistency with CAA section 136, we are proposing to use the
phrase ``sent to sale'' in 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(1)(i)(B) through (D), 40
CFR 98.236(aa)(1)(iii)(C) through (E), and 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(2)(i)
through (vi) instead of ``for sale,'' the phrase used in the existing
data elements. This proposed amendment is for consistency in language
rather than any expected difference in the volumes to be reported or
the interpretation of the terms, as the existing term was intended to
have the same meaning. As described in section III.D of this preamble,
we are also proposing additional throughput data elements to provide
separate, well-level reporting of throughputs associated with wells in
the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production and Offshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Production industry segments that are permanently shut-
in and plugged. These proposed data elements, if finalized, are
anticipated to be useful in the future evaluation of the associated
exemptions in CAA section 136(f)(7).
Specifically for the Offshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production
industry segment, the existing throughput requirements are for ``gas
handled'' at the platform, which includes production volumes as well as
volumes transferred via pipeline from another location. We note that
the term ``gas handled'' is not used by other reporting programs to
which offshore production facilities also report, such as the BOEM or
the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). We have also recently
received a question through the GHGRP Help Desk asking about
differences in throughput between the published BOEM data for the
parameter, lease production reporting, and throughput volumes published
in the subpart W data, so there are potentially differences in the ways
reporters are interpretating and reporting the ``gas handled'' data
element as compared to production volumes reported to other programs.
In order to provide consistency with the language in CAA section 136
across both production industry segments and help the EPA implement CAA
section 136, we are proposing to revise the reporting elements in 40
CFR 98.236(aa)(2) for the Offshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production
industry segment so they are analogous to those in Onshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Production. We are seeking comment on whether we should
add the proposed throughputs as new data elements and continue to
retain the existing reporting elements in 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(2)(i) and
(ii), including the rationale for maintaining the existing reporting
elements.
b. Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
Through our verification efforts, it has become apparent that the
reporting of some of the throughput volumes for the Onshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry segment are incomplete
in the sense that they do not include all the quantities of natural gas
(and hydrocarbon liquids) transported from the facility (i.e., leaving
the facility). In some cases, this appears to be due to the specific
wording of the reporting elements in existing 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(10)(ii)
and (iv) that appear to limit the quantities to the quantities
transported to four specific downstream endpoints (e.g., processing
plants). However, the EPA indicated in the preamble to the final rule
that added the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting
industry segment that the throughputs transported from the facility
were intended to be the total quantities transported downstream (80 FR
64280, October 22, 2015). Therefore, be consistent with the EPA's
original intent for these data elements, we are proposing to amend 40
CFR 98.236(aa)(10)(ii) and (iv) to clarify that the downstream
endpoints listed in the current reporting elements are examples of
potential destinations and to specify that the reported quantities
should be the natural gas or hydrocarbon liquids, respectively,
transported to downstream operations such as one of those endpoints. We
are also proposing to add storage facilities to the list of downstream
operations to make the list of examples more comprehensive. Finally,
for consistency with the text in CAA section 136 and to help the EPA
implement CAA section 136 in the future, we are proposing to amend 40
CFR 98.236(aa)(10)(ii) to specify that the natural gas is transported
``through the facility'' and then to a downstream operation. As a
result of these proposed amendments, the reported quantities should
include all natural gas and hydrocarbon liquids transported downstream
from the facility (i.e., leaving the basin or leaving the gathering
system owner or operator).
In addition to reviewing the reported throughputs, we also reviewed
the definitions in subpart W associated with the industry segment and
the facility. For the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and
Boosting industry segment, we found that the definitions for
``Gathering and boosting system'' and ``Gathering and boosting system
owner or operator'' in 40 CFR 98.238 specified that an onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting system or owner or
operator must receive natural gas or petroleum from an onshore
petroleum and natural gas production facility. Those definitions would
exclude facilities that receive natural gas or petroleum from other
onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting facilities and
do not receive any natural gas or petroleum from onshore petroleum and
natural gas production facilities. Therefore, there are potentially
entire onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities or volumes of gas through onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facilities that are unaccounted for under the
existing rule. We are proposing to amend the definition of ``Gathering
and boosting system'' and ``Gathering and boosting owner or operator''
in 40 CFR 98.238 to specify that these systems may receive natural gas
and/or petroleum from one or more other onshore petroleum and natural
gas gathering and boosting systems in addition to production
facilities.
[[Page 50361]]
c. Onshore Natural Gas Processing
Subpart W currently requires onshore natural gas processing
facilities to report the quantity of natural gas received at the gas
processing plant in existing 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(3)(i), however, the rule
does not currently specify whether the volume is all natural gas that
enters the facility--including natural gas that passes through the
facility without being processed further (i.e., ``pass-through
volumes'')--or just natural gas received for processing. As discussed
in section III.U.1 of this preamble, to maintain consistency with
subpart NN and reduce burden for fractionators, the EPA is proposing to
revise 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(3)(i) to specify that the subpart W quantity
of gas received is the gas received for processing and is also
proposing that fractionators do not have to report a quantity under 40
CFR 98.236(aa)(3)(i) if they report under subpart NN. Subpart NN does
not require reporting of the gas leaving the facility, but to maintain
consistency in the interpretation of the throughputs, to date, the EPA
has provided guidance to facilities that the volume reported in
accordance with 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(3)(ii) is that which has been
processed at the facility and should exclude volumes of gas that are of
pipeline specification and only passed through the facility.
However, to be consistent with CAA section 136(f)(2), the
throughput should include all volumes of natural gas which pass through
the facility or are sent to sales. Therefore, considering the proposed
amendments to 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(3)(i) and guidance that has been
historically provided for 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(3)(ii), a new reporting
element for natural gas processing throughput is needed to fully
capture all volumes through the facility (i.e., those that are
processed and those that pass through the facility which are not
processed). As such, we are proposing to add a new reporting element
for the Onshore Natural Gas Processing industry segment in 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(3)(ix) to capture all natural gas that is processed and/or
passed through the facility consistent with the text in CAA section 136
(i.e., ``natural gas sent to sale from or through facilities'').
2. Onshore Natural Gas Processing and Natural Gas Distribution
Throughputs Also Reported Under Subpart NN
Onshore Natural Gas Processing plants are required to report seven
facility-level throughput-related items under subpart W, as specified
in existing 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(3). These seven data reporting elements
include: quantities of natural gas received and processed gas leaving
the gas processing plant, cumulative quantities of NGLs received and
leaving the gas processing plant, the average mole fractions of
CH4 and CO2 in the natural gas received, and an
indication of whether the facility fractionates NGLs. Natural Gas
Distribution companies are also required to report seven throughput
volumes under subpart W, as specified in existing 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(9).
These seven data reporting elements include: the quantity of gas
received at all custody transfer stations; the quantity of natural gas
withdrawn from in-system storage; the quantity of gas added to in-
system storage; the quantity of gas delivered to end users; the
quantity of gas transferred to third parties; the quantity of gas
consumed by the LDC for operational purposes; and the quantity of gas
stolen.
The EPA has received stakeholder comments related to some of these
reporting elements.\124\ These stakeholders have commented that the
reporting elements included in subpart W are redundant with data
reported elsewhere within the GHGRP, specifically under subpart NN
(Suppliers of Natural Gas and Natural Gas Liquids). Subpart NN requires
NGL fractionators and LDCs to report the quantities of natural gas and
natural gas liquid products supplied downstream and their associated
emissions. For example, for natural gas processing plants, commenters
stated that both subparts require reporting of the volume of natural
gas received and the volume of NGLs received. Subpart W also requires
reporting of total NGLs leaving the processing plant, while subpart NN
requires reporting of the volume of each individual NGL product
supplied. For LDCs, these commenters have stated that some duplicative
reporting is required as well. For example, commenters stated that both
subparts require reporting of the volume of natural gas received,
volume placed into and out of storage each year, and volume transferred
to other LDCs or to a pipeline as well as some other duplicative data.
In addition, commenters stated that the reporting elements included in
subparts W and NN for LDCs are redundant with data reported to the EIA
on Form EIA-176, the Annual Report of Natural and Supplemental Gas
Supply and Disposition.\125\ The commenters explained that subpart W
and subpart NN collect nearly the same data, and stated that
discrepancies between the data sets are due to the use of inconsistent
terminology. Commenters also suggested that due to the redundancy and
availability of data reported to the EIA for LDCs, the EPA should
remove the throughput-related reporting requirements for the Natural
Gas Distribution industry segment from the GHGRP altogether. Commenters
added that if the requirements are maintained, the EPA should reconcile
the terminology used within the GHGRP and clarify the reporting
elements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\124\ See Docket Id. Nos. EPA-HQ-OA-2017-0190-46726, EPA-HQ-OA-
2017-0190-1958, EPA-HQ-OA-2017-0190-2066 available in Compilation of
Comments Related to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program submitted
to the Department of Commerce under Docket ID No. DOC-2017-0001 and
the Environmental Protection Agency under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OA-
2017-0190 and in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-
HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
\125\ Form EIA-176 is available at the U.S. EIA website at
https://www.eia.gov/survey/form/eia_176/form.pdf; the Form EIA-176
Instructions are available at https://www.eia.gov/survey/form/eia_176/instructions.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EIA report is submitted in the spring of each year and covers
the previous calendar year. After completing internal audits of the
reports, EIA publishes the data for each LDC on its website in the
fall. The EIA data provides detailed information on the volume of gas
received, gas stored, gas removed from storage, gas deliveries by
sector, and HHV data. The EPA previously reviewed the possibility of
obtaining data by accessing existing Federal Government reporting and
provided the following response in the subpart NN response to public
comments document accompanying the 2009 Final Rule: \126\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\126\ See page 7 of EPA Response to Public Comment Vol. 39
Subpart NN at https://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/ghgrp-2009-final-rule-response-comments-documents, also available in the docket for
this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA ``decided not to modify the final rule because
collecting data directly in a central system will enable the EPA to
electronically verify all data reported under this rule quickly and
consistently, to use the information for non-statistical purposes, and
to handle confidential business information in accordance with the
Clean Air Act.''
In the specific case of subpart NN, the EPA also
``determined that it could not rely on EIA data to collect facility-
level data from fractionators and company-level data from LDCs.''
Additionally, the EPA ``seeks data that is beyond what EIA
collects, such as quality assurance information, verification data, and
information on odorized propane'' and ``data on site-specific HHV and
carbon content from those sites that choose to sample and
[[Page 50362]]
test products rather than use default emission factors.''
After further review of the data available through EIA, the
stakeholder comments described earlier in this section, and the
reporting requirements in subpart W and subpart NN, the EPA is
proposing to eliminate duplicative elements from subpart W for
facilities that report to subpart NN, consistent with section II.C of
this preamble. The EPA is proposing to amend the reporting requirements
in 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(3) for Onshore Natural Gas Processing plants that
both fractionate NGLs (approximately 100 of the 450 subpart W natural
gas processing plants) and also report as a supplier under subpart NN.
For this subset of facilities, the EPA reviewed the data from subpart W
and subpart NN and determined that there are no gas processing plants
that report as fractionators under subpart W that do not also report
under subpart NN without supplying a valid explanation.\127\ During
this review, the EPA found that some of the data elements included in
subpart W overlap with data elements in subpart NN. Specifically, the
data elements in 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(3)(i), (iii) and (iv) of subpart W
overlap with data elements in subpart NN as specified in 40 CFR
98.406(a)(3), 98.406(a)(1) and (2), 98.406(a)(4)(i) and (ii),
respectively.\128\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\127\ One such explanation is that the gas processing plant
fractionates NGLs to supply fuel for use entirely on-site (i.e., the
fuel is not supplied downstream). Due to definitional differences
between the two subparts, this facility is defined as a fractionator
for purposes of subpart W but is not a supplier that must report
under subpart NN.
\128\ While it is the EPA's intention that the reported quantity
of natural gas received at the facility in existing 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(3)(i) should be the quantity of natural gas received for
processing, consistent with the requirement to report the annual
volume of natural gas received for processing in existing 40 CFR
98.406(a)(3), some reporters have indicated in correspondence with
the EPA via e-GGRT that they are including gas that is received at
but not processed by the onshore natural gas processing facility
(i.e., gas that was processed elsewhere and passes through the
onshore natural gas processing facility). Therefore, to clarify the
EPA's intention and reinforce the consistency of the subpart W and
subpart NN quantities, the EPA is proposing to revise 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(3)(i) to indicate that that reported quantity should be
natural gas received at the gas processing plant for processing in
the calendar year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To eliminate reporting redundancies, the EPA is proposing several
amendments to 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(3). First, to clarify which facilities
have data overlap between subparts W and NN, the EPA is proposing to
add a reporting element for natural gas processing plants at 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(3)(viii) to indicate whether they report as a supplier under
subpart NN. Next, the EPA is proposing that facilities that indicate
that they both fractionate NGLs and report as a supplier under subpart
NN would no longer be required to report the quantities of natural gas
received or NGLs received or leaving the gas processing plant as
specified in 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(3)(i), (iii) and (iv); this data would
continue to be reported under subpart NN as specified in 40 CFR
98.406(a)(3), 98.406(a)(1) and (2), 98.406(a)(4)(i) and (ii),
respectively, thus, maintaining the ability to verify associated
emissions reported under subpart W. See Table 3 of this preamble for
more information.
These facilities would, however, be required to continue reporting
the data elements specified in 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(3)(ii) and (v) through
(viii), as these reporting elements do not overlap with subpart NN
reporting elements. Natural gas processing plants that do not
fractionate or that fractionate but do not report as a supplier under
subpart NN would continue to report all of the reporting elements for
natural gas processing plants as specified in 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(3).
The EPA is also proposing to remove the reporting elements for
throughput for LDCs in 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(9). The EPA reviewed the data
from subpart W and subpart NN and determined that there are no LDCs
that report under subpart W that do not also report under subpart NN.
In fact, an average of 385 LDCs report under subpart NN, while 170 LDCs
report under subpart W. Subpart NN therefore provides more
comprehensive coverage of the Natural Gas Distribution industry
segment. Additionally, subpart NN has been in effect for LDCs since
RY2011 while subpart W throughput information has only been collected
since RY2015; thus, subpart NN has a more robust historical data set.
During this review, the EPA determined that the data elements found in
40 CFR 98.236(aa)(9)(i) through (v) of subpart W overlap with data
elements in subpart NN as specified in 40 CFR 98.406(b)(1) through (3),
98.406(b)(5) and (6), and 98.406(b)(13). To eliminate reporting
redundancies, the EPA is proposing to remove these reporting elements
from subpart W.
Table 3 of this preamble shows all the duplicative data elements
that the EPA is proposing to remove from subpart W for facilities that
also report to subpart NN.
Table 3--List of Proposed Subpart W Data Elements To Be Removed Where Analogous Subpart NN Data Elements are
Reported
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart W data elements proposed to be eliminated Analogous Subpart NN data elements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citation Description Citation Description
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Local Distribution Companies
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 98.236(aa)(9)(i)........... Quantity of natural gas Sec. 98.406(b)(1) Annual volume of natural
received at all custody Sec. 98.406(b)(5). gas received by the LDC
transfer stations. at its city gate
stations and Annual
volume natural gas that
bypassed the city
gate(s).
Sec. 98.236(aa)(9)(ii).......... Quantity of natural gas Sec. 98.406(b)(3).. Annual volume natural gas
withdrawn from in-system withdrawn from on-system
storage. storage and annual
volume of vaporized LNG
withdrawn from storage.
Sec. 98.236(aa)(9)(iii)......... Quantity of natural gas Sec. 98.406(b)(2).. Annual volume of natural
added to in-system gas placed into storage
storage. or liquefied and stored.
Sec. 98.236(aa)(9)(iv).......... Quantity of natural gas Sec. Annual volume of natural
delivered to end users. 98.406(b)(13)(i) gas delivered by the LDC
through (iv). to residential
consumers, commercial
consumers, industrial
consumers, electricity
generating facilities.
[[Page 50363]]
Sec. 98.236(aa)(9)(v)........... Quantity of natural gas Sec. 98.406(b)(6).. Annual volume of natural
transferred to third gas delivered to
parties. downstream gas
transmission pipelines
and other LDCs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Natural Gas Processing Plants That Fractionate NGLs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 98.236(aa)(3)(i)........... Quantity of natural gas Sec. 98.406(a)(3).. Annual volume of natural
received. gas received for
processing.
Sec. 98.236(aa)(3)(iii)......... Cumulative quantity of all Sec. 98.406(a)(2) Annual quantity of each
NGLs (bulk and Sec. NGL product received and
fractionated) received. 98.406(a)(4)(i). annual quantities of y-
grade, o-grade and other
bulk NGLs received.
Sec. 98.236(aa)(3)(iv).......... Cumulative quantity of all Sec. 98.406(a)(1) Annual quantity of each
NGLs (bulk and Sec. NGL product supplied and
fractionated) leaving. 98.406(a)(4)(ii). annual quantities of y-
grade, o-grade and other
bulk NGLs supplied.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA is also proposing to remove the reporting elements for the
volume of natural gas used for operational purposes and natural gas
stolen specified in 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(9)(vi) and (vii). These reporting
elements are unique to subpart W, require additional burden to
estimate, and have not been used for the EPA's analyses of the subpart
W data. As a result of proposing to remove all of the 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(9) data elements for the reasons explained in this section
of this preamble, the EPA proposes to reserve paragraph 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(9).
3. Onshore Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline Storage Throughputs
Similar to Natural Gas Distribution facilities, Onshore Natural Gas
Transmission Pipeline facilities are currently required to report five
throughput volumes under subpart W, as specified in existing 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(11). These five data reporting elements include: the
quantity of natural gas received at all custody transfer stations; the
quantity of natural gas withdrawn from in-system storage; the quantity
of gas added to in-system storage; the quantity of gas transferred to
third parties; and the quantity of gas consumed by the transmission
pipeline facility for operational purposes. As noted in section III.U.1
of this preamble, the EPA has received stakeholder feedback on the
reporting elements for Natural Gas Distribution facilities, including
questions submitted to the GHGRP Help Desk, regarding the term ``in-
system storage.'' Although the questions were specific to Natural Gas
Distribution facilities, the term ``in-system storage'' is also
included in the throughput reporting elements for Onshore Natural Gas
Transmission Pipeline facilities at existing 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(11)(ii)
and (iii). After consideration of the stakeholder feedback, the EPA is
proposing to revise these provisions to better characterize the
existing term ``in-system.'' Specifically, we are proposing to amend 40
CFR 98.236(aa)(11)(ii) and (iii) to replace the term ``in-system'' with
clarifying language that specifies withdrawals/additions of natural gas
from storage are referring to Underground Natural Gas Storage and LNG
Storage facilities that are owned and operated by the onshore natural
gas transmission pipeline owner or operator that do not report under
subpart W as direct emitters themselves. These amendments are expected
to improve data quality consistent with section II.D of this preamble.
V. Other Proposed Minor Revisions or Clarifications
See Table 4 of this preamble for the miscellaneous minor technical
corrections not previously described in this preamble that we are
proposing throughout subpart W, consistent with section II.D of this
preamble.
Table 4--Proposed Technical Corrections to Subpart W
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section (40 CFR) Description of proposed amendment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
98.230(a)(2)................. Revise the instance of ``well pad'' to
read ``well-pad'' to correct
inconsistency in the term.
98.230(a)(9)................. Remove the ``)'' after ``GOR'' to correct
a typographical error.
98.232 introductory text..... Add reference to paragraph (l) of this
section to clarify that annual reports
must include the information specified
in paragraph (l) if applicable.
98.232(c)(17), (d)(5) and Revise the instances of ``acid gas
(j)(3). removal vents'' to read ``acid gas
removal unit vents'' for consistency
with the defined term ``Acid gas removal
unit (AGR)'' in 40 CFR 98.238.
98.233(d).................... Revise the instances of ``AGR unit'' to
read ``AGR'' for consistency with the
defined term ``Acid gas removal unit
(AGR)'' in 40 CFR 98.238.
98.233(e)(1)(x), Add ``at the absorber inlet'' to the end
98.236(e)(1)(xi) and (xii). of the paragraph to clarify the location
for the wet natural gas temperature and
pressure to be used for modeling.
98.233(j), 98.236(j)......... Revise the instances of ``oil,'' ``oil/
condensate,'' and ``liquid'' to read
``hydrocarbon liquids'' for consistency
with the requirement in 40 CFR 98.233(j)
to calculate emissions from
``atmospheric pressure fixed roof
storage tanks receiving hydrocarbon
produced liquids,'' as noted in the 2015
amendments to subpart W (80 FR 64272,
October 22, 2015).
98.233(k).................... Revise the introductory sentence in this
section to specify that 40 CFR 98.233(k)
does not apply to condensate storage
tanks that route emissions to flares or
other controls for consistency with
proposed amendment that would move
procedures for calculating flared
emissions from 40 CFR 98.233(k) to 40
CFR 98.233(n).
[[Page 50364]]
98.233(n)(5)................. Correct the cross reference in the
definition of the equation variable
``Yj'' from paragraph (n)(1) to (n)(2).
98.233(o) introductory text Move the last sentence in each paragraph
and (p) introductory text. to be the second sentence to clarify
that the calculation methodology for
compressors routed to flares,
combustion, or vapor recovery systems
apply to all industry segments.
98.233(o) introductory text Revise the instances of ``vapor
and (p) introductory text, recovery'' to read ``vapor recovery
236(o)(2)(ii) and (p)(2)(ii). system'' to correct inconsistency in the
term.
98.233(p)(1)(i).............. Correct the internal cross reference from
paragraph (o) to paragraph (p).
98.233(p)(4)(ii)(C).......... Add missing ``in'' to read ``according to
methods set forth in Sec. 98.234(d).''
98.233(r) introductory text.. Revise the instance of ``CH'' in the
third sentence to read ``CH4'' to
correct a typographical error.
98.233(r), equations W-32A Correct the cross reference in the
and W-32B. definition of the equation variable
``Es,MR,i'' and the equation variable
``CountMR'' from paragraph (q)(9) to
(q)(2)(xi) or (q)(3)(vii)(B).
98.233(r)(6)(ii)............. Add reference to components listed in 40
CFR 98.232(i)(3), for consistency with
proposed amendments to 40 CFR
98.233(r)(6)(i).
98.233(t)(2)................. Revise the definition of equation
variable ``Za'' to include the sentence
following the definition of that
variable to correct a typographical
error.
98.233(u)(2)(ii)............. Format the heading to be in italicized
text.
98.233(z).................... Revise the instances of ``high heat
value'' to read ``higher heating value''
to correct inconsistency in the term.
98.233(z), equations W-39A Remove unnecessary ``constituent'' from
and W-39B. ``CO2 constituent'' and ``methane
constituent'' and remove ``gas'' from
``gas hydrocarbon constituent.'' Add
missing ``the'' to read ``to the
combustion unit'' in several variable
definitions.
98.234(e).................... Renumber the Peng Robinson equation of
state from equation W-41 to equation W-
46 to provide space for five new
equations related to new source types in
proposed 40 CFR 98.233(dd) and (ee).
98.234(f).................... Remove and reserve paragraph for
provisions for best available monitoring
methods for RY2015, as reports for that
reporting year can no longer be
submitted to the EPA.
98.234(g).................... Remove and reserve paragraph for
provisions for best available monitoring
methods for RY2016, as reports for that
reporting year can no longer be
submitted to the EPA.
98.236 introductory text..... Add missing ``than'' to read ``report gas
volumes at standard conditions rather
than the gas volumes at actual
conditions''
98.236(c)(5)(i) through (iii) Edits to explicitly state that the
reporting requirements in this section
apply to pneumatic pumps that are vented
direct to atmosphere and for which
emissions are calculated using the
default emission factor (Calculation
Method 3).
Revise ``operational'' to ``pumping
liquid'' in the description of the
reported time element in 98.236(c)(5)(i)
to be consistent with the proposed
change described in section III.E.3 of
this preamble for Calculation Method 2.
98.236(d)(2)(iii)(B)......... Revise ``natural gas flow rate'' to read
``natural gas feed flow rate'' for
consistency with the parameters listed
in 40 CFR 98.233(d)(4)(i).
98.236(e)(1) and (2)......... Revise the instances of ``vented to'' a
control device, vapor recovery, or a
flare to read ``routed to'' to correct
inconsistency in the phrases ``vented
to'' and ``routed to.''
Revise the instances of ``vapor recovery
device'' to read ``vapor recovery
system'' to correct inconsistency in the
term.
98.236(j)(2)................. Clarify that the reported information in
paragraphs (j)(1)(i) through (xvi)
should only include those atmospheric
storage tanks with emissions calculated
using Calculation Method 3.
98.236(k)(1)(iii)............ Correct the internal cross reference from
``Sec. 98.233(k)(2)'' to ``Sec.
98.233(k)(1).''
98.236(k)(2)................. Add a cross reference to Sec.
98.233(k)(2) and revise sentence to
specify that the reported method used to
measure leak rates should be one
provided in that section.
98.236(l)(1), (2), (3), and Revise the instances of ``vented to a
(4) introductory text. flare'' to read ``routed to a flare'' to
correct inconsistency in the phrases
``vented to'' and ``routed to.''
98.236(p)(3)(ii)............. Add a missing period at the end of the
sentence.
98.236(bb)................... Clarify that reporting for missing data
procedures includes the procedures used
to substitute an unavailable value of a
parameter (per 40 CFR 98.235(h)).
98.236(cc)................... Correct the cross references from
paragraph (l)(1)(iv), (l)(2)(iv),
(l)(3)(iii), and (l)(4)(iii) to
(l)(1)(v), (l)(2)(v), (l)(3)(iv), and
(l)(4)(iv), respectively.
98.238....................... Remove the second definition of
``Facility with respect to natural gas
distribution for purposes of reporting
under this subpart and for the
corresponding subpart A requirements''
to eliminate an inadvertent identical
duplicative definition.
Tables W-1 through W-7 to Replace Tables W-1 through W-7 with new
subpart W of part 98. Tables W-1 through W-6 to reorganize and
consolidate the emission factor tables
so that there are separate tables by
pollutant (whole gas, THC, and CH4) and
by type of factor (population and leaker
emission factors). Update cross
references to these tables accordingly
throughout subpart W.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Schedule for the Proposed Amendments
The EPA is planning to consider the comments on these proposed
changes, and, if any of the proposed amendments are finalized, to
respond to the comments and promulgate any amendments by August 16,
2024.\129\ We
[[Page 50365]]
are proposing that these amendments would become effective on January
1, 2025, and that reporters would implement the majority of the changes
beginning with reports prepared for RY2025 and submitted March 31,
2026. The exception is the proposed reporting of the quantities of
natural gas, crude oil, and condensate produced that is sent to sale in
the calendar year for each well permanently shut-in and plugged
(proposed 40 CFR 98.236(aa)(1)(iii)(C) through (E) and proposed 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(2)(iv) through (vi)); those provisions would become
effective on January 1, 2025 and reporters would include that
information in their reports prepared for RY2024 and submitted March
31, 2025. The submission date for RY2025 reports is over a year after
we expect a final rule based on this proposal to be finalized, if
finalized, thus providing a reasonable period for reporters to adjust
to any finalized amendments. The proposed effective date would also
allow ample time for the EPA to implement the changes into e-GGRT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\129\ Section 136(h) of the CAA requires subpart W to be revised
as specified in that provision ``not later than 2 years after the
date of enactment of this section.'' The section was enacted via
Public Law No: 117-169 on August 16, 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are likewise proposing that the proposed CBI determinations
discussed in section VI of this preamble would become effective on
January 1, 2025. The majority of the determinations are for new or
revised data elements that would be included in annual GHG reports
prepared for RY2025 and submitted March 31, 2026. The determinations
related to the reporting of the quantities of natural gas, crude oil,
and condensate produced that is sent to sale in the calendar year for
each well permanently shut-in and plugged would apply the first year
that data is collected (i.e., RY2024 data submitted on or before March
31, 2025). Finally, there is one circumstance, discussed in detail in
section V of this preamble, where the proposed determination covers
data included in annual GHG reports submitted for prior years. In all
cases, the proposed determinations for the data that the EPA has
already received for these prior years or receives going forward for
any reporting year would become effective on January 1, 2025.
V. Proposed Confidentiality and Reporting Determinations for Certain
Data Reporting Elements
A. Overview and Background
In this action we are proposing confidentiality determinations for
new or substantially revised data elements that would be collected
under the proposed rule amendments.
1. Background on EPA's Treatment of Data Collected Under Part 98
Following proposal of part 98 (74 FR 16448, April 10, 2009), the
EPA received comments addressing the issue of whether certain data
could be entitled to confidential treatment. In response to these
comments, the EPA stated in the preamble to the 2009 Final Rule (74 FR
56387, October 30, 2009) that through a notice and comment process, we
would establish those data elements that are entitled to confidential
treatment. This proposal is one of a series of rules dealing with
confidentiality determinations for data reported under part 98,
including subpart C (General Stationary Fuel Combustion) and W
(Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems).
75 FR 39094, July 7, 2010. Describes the data categories
and category-based determinations the EPA developed for the part 98
data elements.
76 FR 30782, May 26, 2011; hereafter referred to as the
``2011 Final CBI Rule.'' Assigned data elements to data categories and
published the final CBI determinations for the data elements in 34 part
98 subparts, except for those data elements that were assigned to the
``Inputs to Emission Equations'' data category.
77 FR 48072, August 13, 2012. Finalized confidentiality
determinations for data elements reported under nine subparts,
including subpart W, except for those data elements that are ``inputs
to emission equations''.
78 FR 69337, November 29, 2013. Finalized determinations
for new and revised data elements in 15 subparts, including subpart C,
except for those data elements that are ``inputs to emission
equations''.
79 FR 63750, October 24, 2014. Revised recordkeeping and
reporting requirements for ``inputs to emission equations'' for 23
subparts and finalized confidentiality determinations for new data
elements in 11 subparts, including subpart W.
79 FR 70352, November 25, 2014. Finalized confidentiality
determinations for new and substantially revised data elements in
subpart W.
80 FR 64262, October 22, 2015. Finalized confidentiality
determinations for new data elements in subpart W.
81 FR 86490, November 30, 2016. Finalized confidentiality
determinations for new or substantially revised data elements in
subpart W.
81 FR 89188, December 9, 2016. Finalized confidentiality
determinations for new or substantially revised data elements in 18
subparts, including subpart C.
87 FR 36920, June 21, 2022. Describes the EPA's revised
approach to assessing data in response to Food Marketing Institute v.
Argus Leader Media, 139 S. Ct. 2356 (2019) (hereafter referred to as
Argus Leader).\130\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\130\ See Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To support the proposed amendments to part 98 described in section
III of this preamble, we are proposing confidentiality determinations
or ``emission data'' designations, in keeping with our existing
approach (see section V.B.1 of this preamble), for the following:
New or substantially revised reporting requirements (i.e.,
the proposed change requires additional or different data to be
reported);
Existing reporting requirements for which the EPA did not
previously finalize a confidentiality determination or ``emission
data'' designation.
Further, we propose to designate certain new or substantially
revised data elements as ``inputs to emission equations'' falling
within the definition of ``emission data.'' For each element that we
propose would fall in this category, we further propose whether the
data element would be directly reported to the EPA or whether it would
be entered into e-GGRT's Inputs Verification Tool (IVT) (see section
V.C of this preamble for a discussion of ``inputs to emission
equations'').
2. Summary of Data Elements Affected by the Proposed Amendments to Part
98
Table 5 of this preamble provides the number of affected data
elements and the affected subparts for each of these proposed actions.
[[Page 50366]]
Table 5--Summary of Proposed Actions Related to Data Confidentiality
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed actions related to data Number of data
confidentiality elements \a\ Subpart(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
New or substantially revised 522 C, W
reporting requirements for which
the EPA is proposing a
confidentiality determination or
``emission data'' designation.
Existing reporting requirements for 1 W
which the EPA is proposing a
confidentiality determination or
``emission data'' designation
because the EPA did not previously
make a confidentiality
determination or ``emission data''
designation.
New or substantially revised 162 W
reporting requirements that the EPA
is proposing be designated as
``inputs to emission equations''
and for which the EPA is proposing
reporting determinations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ These data elements are individually listed in the memoranda: (1)
Proposed Confidentiality Determinations and Emission Data Designations
for Data Elements in Proposed Revisions to the Greenhouse Gas
Reporting Rule for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems (2) Proposed
Reporting Determinations for Data Elements Assigned to the Inputs to
Emission Equations Data Category in Proposed Revisions to the
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems,
available in the docket for this rulemaking (Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2023-0234).
The majority of the proposed determinations would apply at the same
time as the proposed schedule described in section IV of this preamble.
In the case where the EPA is re-proposing from the June 2022 proposal a
determination for an existing data element where one was not previously
made, the proposed determination would be effective on January 1, 2025,
and would apply to annual reports submitted for RY2025, as well as all
prior years that the data were collected. The determination related to
the treatment of this prior year data will not change how the data was
actually treated by the Agency, it will only conform the text of the
determination to the actual confidentiality status the data has had
since it was first collected.
B. Proposed Confidentiality Determinations and Emissions Data
Designations
1. Proposed Approach
The EPA is proposing to assess the data elements in this proposed
rule, following the same approach as described in the 2022 Proposed
Rule (87 FR 36920, June 21, 2022). In that proposal, the EPA described
a revised approach to assessing data in response to Food Marketing
Institute v. Argus Leader Media, 139 S. Ct. 2356 (2019) (hereafter
referred to as Argus Leader).\131\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\131\ In the 2022 Proposed Rule (87 FR 36920, June 21, 2022),
the EPA proposed that the Argus Leader decision does not affect our
historical approach to designating data elements as ``inputs to
emission equations'' or our previous approach for designating new
and revised reporting requirements as ``emission data,'' which are
described in the July 7, 2010 proposal (75 FR 39094), 2011 Final CBI
Rule, and October 24, 2014 final rule (79 FR 63750). For reporting
elements that the EPA did not designate as ``emission data'' or
``inputs to emission equations,'' the EPA proposed to revise the
historical approach to assign data elements to data categories
established in the 2011 Final CBI Rule, and instead proposed to
assess each individual reporting element according to the Argus
Leader criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We propose to continue identifying new and revised reporting
elements that qualify as ``emission data'' (i.e., data necessary to
determine the identity, amount, frequency, or concentration of the
emission emitted by the reporting facilities) by evaluating the data
for assignment to one of the four data categories designated by the
2011 Final CBI Rule to meet the CAA definition of ``emission data'' in
40 CFR 2.301(a)(2)(i) \132\ (hereafter referred to as ``emission data
categories''). Refer to section II.B of the July 7, 2010, proposal for
descriptions of each of these data categories and the EPA's rationale
for designating each data category as ``emission data.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\132\ See section I.C of the July 7, 2010 proposal (75 FR 39100)
for a discussion of the definition of ``emission data.'' As
discussed therein, the relevant paragraphs (to the GHGRP) of the CAA
definition of ``emission data'' include 40 CFR 2.301(a)(2)(i)(A) and
(C), as follows: (A) ``Information necessary to determine the
identity, amount, frequency, concentration, or other characteristics
(to the extent related to air quality) of any emission which has
been emitted by the source (or of any pollutant resulting from any
emission by the source), or any combination of the foregoing;'' and
(C) ``A general description of the location and/or nature of the
source to the extent necessary to identify the source and to
distinguish it from other sources (including, to the extent
necessary for such purposes, a description of the device,
installation, or operation constituting the source).''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For data elements designated as ``inputs to emission equations,''
the EPA proposes to assign data elements to one of two subcategories,
including data elements entered into IVT and those directly reported to
the EPA. See section V.C of this preamble for further descriptions of
each of these data categories.
For new or revised data elements that the EPA does not propose to
designate as ``emission data'' or ``inputs to emission equations,'' the
EPA proposes to assess each individual reporting element according to
the Argus Leader standard, established in 2019. Accordingly, we propose
to evaluate each new or revised data element not designated as
``emission data'' or ``inputs to emission equations'' individually to
determine whether the information is customarily and actually treated
as private by the reporter and are proposing a confidentiality
determination based on that evaluation.
Consistent with the 40 CFR part 2 procedures, this rulemaking
provides an opportunity for affected stakeholders to justify any
confidentiality claim they may have for the data they are required to
submit under parts 98 (except for emission data which are not entitled
to confidential treatment).
2. Proposed Confidentiality Determinations and ``Emission Data''
Designations
In this section, we discuss the proposed confidentiality
determinations and ``emission data'' designations for 522 new or
substantially revised data elements. We also discuss one existing data
element (i.e., not proposed to be substantially revised) for which for
no determination has been previously established.
a. Proposed Confidentiality Determinations and ``Emission Data''
Designations for New or Substantially Revised Data Reporting Elements
For the 522 new and substantially revised data elements, the EPA is
proposing ``emission data'' designations for 277 data elements and
confidentiality determinations for 245 data elements. The EPA is
proposing to designate 277 new or substantially revised data elements
as ``emission data'' by assigning the data elements to three emission
data categories (established in the 2011 Final CBI Rule as discussed in
section V.B.1 of this preamble), as follows:
114 data elements that are proposed to be reported under
subpart W are proposed to be assigned to the ``Emissions'' emission
data category;
[[Page 50367]]
126 data elements that are proposed to be reported under
subparts C and W are proposed to be assigned to the ``Facility and Unit
Identifier Information'' emission data category; and
37 data elements that are proposed to be reported under
subparts C and W are proposed to be assigned to the ``Calculation
Methodology and Methodological Tier'' emission data category.
Refer to Table 1 in the memorandum, Proposed Confidentiality
Determinations and Emission Data Designations for Data Elements in
Proposed Revisions to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule for Petroleum
and Natural Gas Systems, available in the docket for this rulemaking
(Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234), for a list of these 277 data
elements proposed to be designated as ``emission data,'' the proposed
emission data category assignment for each data element, and the EPA's
rationale for each proposed ``emission data'' category assignment.
The remaining 245 new and substantially revised data elements
proposed to be reported under subpart W are not proposed to be
designated as ``emission data,'' or ``inputs to emission equations.''
Rather, this proposal assesses each individual reporting element
according to the Argus Leader criteria as discussed in section V.B.1 of
this preamble. Refer to Table 2 in the memorandum, Proposed
Confidentiality Determinations and Emission Data Designations for Data
Elements in Proposed Revisions to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule for
Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems, to see a list of these 245 specific
data elements, the proposed confidentiality determination for each data
element, and the EPA's rationale for each proposed confidentiality
determination. These determinations show the data elements that would
be entitled to confidential treatment if submitted to the EPA, and
those that the EPA would publish.
b. Proposed Confidentiality Determinations for Existing Part 98 Data
Elements for Which No Determination Has Been Previously Established
We are re-proposing one confidentiality determination for a single
data element currently reported under subpart W for which no
confidentiality determination or ``emission data'' designation has been
previously finalized under part 98. In the 2022 Proposed Rule, we
reviewed previous rulemakings and found 26 data elements where a
confidentiality determination or ``emission data'' designation had not
been made under subpart W. In the 2022 Proposed Rule, we had evaluated
these data elements and proposed either confidentiality determinations
or ``emission data'' designations, using the categories established in
the 2011 Final CBI Rule. This proposal would revise 25 out of 26 of
these data elements. Therefore, these 25 revised data elements are
included in the proposed confidentiality determinations and ``emission
data'' designations discussed in section V.B.2.a of this preamble,
consistent with our approach for other data elements that we are
proposing to revise in this proposed rulemaking. That leaves one
existing data element for which no previous determination has been
finalized. We assessed the one remaining data element with no existing
confidentiality determination according to the Argus Leader criteria
and are re-proposing the confidentiality determination from the June
2022 Proposed Rule. Refer to Table 3 in the memorandum, Proposed
Confidentiality Determinations and Emission Data Designations for Data
Elements in Proposed Revisions to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule for
Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems, available in the docket for this
rulemaking (Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234), for details of the
confidentiality determinations.
C. Proposed Reporting Determinations for Inputs to Emissions Equations
In this section, we discuss data elements that the EPA proposes to
assign to the ``Inputs to Emission Equations'' data category. This data
category includes data elements that are the inputs to the emission
equations used by sources that directly emit GHGs to calculate their
annual GHG emissions.\133\ As discussed in section VI.B.1 of the 2022
Proposed Rule (87 FR 36920, June 21, 2022), the EPA determined that the
Argus Leader standard does not apply to our approach for handling data
elements assigned to the ``Inputs to Emission Equations'' data
category.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\133\ For facilities that directly emit GHGs, part 98 includes
equations that facilities use to calculate emission values. The
``Inputs to Emission Equations'' data category includes the data
elements that facilities would be required to enter in the equations
to calculate the facility emissions values, e.g., monthly
consumption or production data or measured values from required
monitoring, such as carbon content. See 75 FR 39094, July 7, 2010
for a full description of the ``Inputs to Emission Equations'' data
category.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA organizes data assigned to the ``Inputs to Emission
Equations'' data category into two subcategories. The first subcategory
includes ``inputs to emission equations'' that must be directly
reported to the EPA. This is done in circumstances where the EPA has
determined that the data elements do not meet the criteria necessary
for them to be entered into the IVT system. These ``inputs to emission
equations,'' once received by the EPA, are not entitled to confidential
treatment. The second subcategory includes ``inputs to emission
equations'' that are entered into IVT. These ``inputs to emission
equations'' are entered into IVT to satisfy the EPA's verification
requirements. These data must be maintained as verification software
records by the submitter, but the data are not included in the annual
report that is submitted to the EPA. This is done in circumstances
where the EPA has determined that the data elements meet the criteria
necessary for them to be entered into the IVT system. Refer to the
memorandum, Proposed Reporting Determinations for Data Elements
Assigned to the Inputs to Emission Equations Data Category in Proposed
Revisions to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule for Petroleum and
Natural Gas Systems, available in the docket for this rulemaking
(Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234), for a discussion of the criteria
established in 2011 for evaluating whether data assigned to the
``Inputs to Emission Equations'' data category should be entered into
the IVT system.
We are proposing to assign 162 new or substantially revised data
elements in subparts C and W to the ``Inputs to Emission Equations''
data category. We evaluated each of the 162 proposed new or
substantially revised data elements assigned to the ``Inputs to
Emission Equations'' data category and determined that none of these
162 data elements meet the criteria necessary for them to be entered
into the IVT system; therefore, we propose that these 162 data elements
be directly reported to the EPA. As ``inputs to emission equations''
are emissions data, these 162 data elements would not be eligible for
confidential treatment once directly reported to the EPA, and they
would be published once received by the EPA. Refer to Table 1 in the
memorandum, Proposed Reporting Determinations for Data Elements
Assigned to the Inputs to Emission Equations Data Category in Proposed
Revisions to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule for Petroleum and
Natural Gas Systems, available in the docket for this rulemaking
(Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234), for a list of these 162 data
elements proposed to be designated as ``inputs to emission equations''
that would be directly reported to the EPA and the EPA's
[[Page 50368]]
rationale for the proposed reporting determinations.
D. Request for Comments on Proposed Amendments to 40 CFR Part 2,
Category Assignments, Confidentiality Determinations, or Determinations
of Inputs To Be Reported
We solicit comment on the proposed categories, confidentiality, and
reporting determinations in this proposed rule. By proposing
confidentiality determinations prior to data reporting through this
proposal and rulemaking process, we are providing potential reporters
an opportunity to submit comments, particularly comments addressing any
data elements not entitled to confidential treatment under this
proposal, but which reporters customarily and actually treat as
private. Likewise, we provide potential reporters an opportunity to
submit comments on whether there are disclosure concerns for data
elements proposed to be categorized as ``inputs to emission equations''
that we propose would be directly reported to the EPA via annual
reports and subsequently released by the EPA. This opportunity to
submit comments is intended to provide reporters with the opportunity
to substantiate their confidentiality claims that would ordinarily be
afforded to reporters when the EPA considers claims for confidential
treatment of information in case-by-case confidentiality determinations
under 40 CFR part 2. In addition, the comment period provides an
opportunity to respond to the EPA's proposed determinations with more
information for the Agency to consider prior to finalization. We will
evaluate the comments on our proposed determinations, including claims
of confidentiality and information substantiating such claims, before
finalizing the confidentiality determinations. Please note that this
will be reporters' only opportunity to substantiate a confidentiality
claim for data elements included in this proposed rule where a
confidentiality determination or reporting determination is being
proposed. Upon finalizing the confidentiality determinations and
reporting determinations of the data elements identified in this
proposed rule, the EPA will release or withhold these data in
accordance with 40 CFR 2.301(d), which contains special provisions
governing the treatment of part 98 data for which confidentiality
determinations have been made through rulemaking pursuant to CAA
sections 114 and 307(d).
If members of the public have reason to believe any data elements
in this proposed rule that are proposed to be treated as confidential
are not customarily and actually treated as private by reporters,
please provide comment explaining why the Agency should not provide an
assurance of confidential treatment for such data. Likewise, if members
of the public have reason to disagree with the EPA's proposal that
``inputs to emission equations'' qualify to be entered into IVT and
retained as verification software records instead of being directly
reported to the EPA, please provide comment explaining why the ``inputs
to emission equations'' do not qualify to be entered into IVT, should
be directly reported to the EPA, and subsequently released by the EPA.
As described in section III.D, the EPA is proposing revisions to
several existing data elements within the Onshore Petroleum and Natural
Gas Production and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and
Boosting industry segments such that the data would be reported by
facilities at the site level. Under the current requirements,
facilities report much of this information aggregated across multiple
sites. Given that the proposed revisions would require that facilities
report more specific information, the EPA is requesting comment on the
confidentiality and reporting determinations for this site-level
reporting. For any revised data elements that fall into an ``emissions
data'' category, the EPA is proposing that the data would continue to
be released regardless of whether it is collected at the site level or
aggregated across sites. However, for data elements that do not fall
into an ``emissions data'' category, the EPA is seeking comment
regarding whether any of these particular data elements are customarily
and actually treated as private together with specific information
supporting this position when reported at the site level. The EPA
believes that the information in this category that would not already
be released as emission data is not information that is customarily and
actually treated as confidential by submitters, even at the site level.
The EPA is aware of outlets where much of this information is already
released publicly, such as State and local records including records
from oil and gas permitting authorities, taxing authorities, and
environmental agencies, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
forms for publicly traded companies, company websites, data services
such as Enverus, S&P Global/IHS Markit, Rystad Energy and Wood
Mackenzie, and publications like Oil &Gas Journal, Petroleum Economist,
and Upstream. Upon consideration of comments, the EPA will consider
releasing this information directly as proposed, or other options that
may take into account confidentiality concerns, but still release as
much of this valuable information to the public as possible.
When submitting comments regarding the confidentiality
determinations or reporting determinations we are proposing in this
action, please identify each individual proposed new, revised, or
existing data element you consider to be confidential or do not
consider to be ``emission data'' in your comments. If the data element
has been designated as ``emission data,'' please explain why you do not
believe the information should be considered ``emission data'' as
defined in 40 CFR 2.301(a)(2)(i). If the data has not been designated
as ``emission data'' and is proposed to not be entitled to confidential
treatment, please explain specifically how the data element is
commercial or financial information that is both customarily and
actually treated as private. Particularly describe the measures
currently taken to keep the data confidential and how that information
has been customarily treated by your company and/or business sector in
the past. This explanation is based on the requirements for
confidential treatment set forth in Argus Leader. If the data element
has been designated as an ``input to an emission equation'' (i.e., not
entitled to confidential treatment) and proposed to be directly
reported to the EPA via annual reports and subsequently released by the
EPA, please explain specifically why there are disclosure concerns.
Please also discuss how this data element may be different from or
similar to data that are already publicly available, including data
already collected and published annually by the GHGRP, as applicable.
Please submit information identifying any publicly available sources of
information containing the specific data elements in question. Data
that are already available through other sources would likely be found
not to qualify for confidential treatment. In your comments, please
identify the manner and location in which each specific data element
you identify is publicly available, 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
International Standard Book Number
[[Page 50369]]
(ISBN) or other identifier. For data published on a website, provide
the address of the website, the date you last visited the website and
identify the website publisher and content author. Please avoid
conclusory and unsubstantiated statements, or general assertions
regarding the confidential nature of the information.
Finally, we are not proposing new confidentiality determinations
and reporting determinations for data reporting elements proposed to be
unchanged or minimally revised because the final confidentiality
determinations and reporting determinations that the EPA made in
previous rules for these unchanged or minimally revised data elements
are unaffected by this proposed amendment and will continue to apply.
The minimally revised data elements are those where we are proposing
revisions that would not require additional or different data to be
reported. For example, we are proposing to amend 40 CFR
98.236(aa)(5)(ii) to clarify that facilities reporting to the
Underground Natural Gas Storage industry segment must report the
quantity of natural gas withdrawn from storage and sent to sale in the
calendar year. As discussed in section III.U of this preamble, we are
proposing several text edits to include ``natural'' before each
instance of ``gas'' and to use the phrase ``sent to sale'' for
consistency with CAA section 136 language. This proposed change is for
consistency in language and would not affect the data collected or the
interpretation of the terms, and therefore we are not proposing a new
or revised confidentiality determination. However, we are soliciting
comment on any cases where a minor revision would affect the previous
confidentiality determination or reporting determination. In your
comments, please identify the specific data element, including name and
citation, and explain why the minor revision would affect the previous
confidentiality determination or reporting determination.
VI. Impacts of the Proposed Amendments
The proposed revisions would amend requirements that apply to the
petroleum and natural gas systems source category of the Greenhouse Gas
Reporting Rule consistent with CAA section 136(h) to ensure that
reporting under subpart W is based on empirical data and accurately
reflects total CH4 emissions and waste emissions from applicable
facilities, and to allow owners and operators of applicable facilities
to submit empirical emissions data that appropriately could demonstrate
the extent to which a charge is owed in future implementation of CAA
section 136. These proposed revisions include improving the existing
calculation, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements. The EPA is
proposing amendments to part 98 in order to implement improvements to
the GHGRP, including revisions to update existing emission factors and
emissions estimation methodologies, revisions to require reporting of
additional data for new emission sources and address potential gaps in
reporting, and revisions to collect data that would improve the EPA's
understanding of the sector-specific processes or other factors that
influence GHG emission rates, verification of collected data, or to
complement or inform other EPA programs. The EPA is also proposing
revisions that would improve implementation of the program, such as
those that would update applicability estimation methodologies, provide
flexibility for or simplifying calculation and monitoring
methodologies, streamline recordkeeping and reporting, and other minor
technical corrections or clarifications identified as a result of
working with the affected sources during rule implementation and
outreach. The EPA anticipates that the proposed revisions to improve
accuracy of reporting would increase costs for reporters. To the extent
consideration of costs is relevant to the EPA's proposal for meeting
its obligation under CAA section 136(h), these anticipated costs are
reasonable.
As discussed in section V of this preamble, we are proposing to
implement these changes beginning in RY2025. Costs have been estimated
over the three years following the year of implementation. The
incremental implementation costs for each reporting year are summarized
in Table 6 of this preamble. The estimated annual average labor burden
is $41.4 million per year and the annual average labor burden per
reporter is $13,500. The incremental burden for subpart W and the
incremental costs per reporter are shown in Table 6 of this preamble.
Table 6--Total Incremental Labor Burden for Reporting Years 2025-2027
[$2021/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost summary RY2025 RY2026 RY2027 Annual average
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Burden by Year.................. $41.4 million..... $41.4 million..... $41.4 million..... $41.4 million.
Number of Reporters............. 3,077............. 3,077............. 3,077............. 3,077.
Incremental Labor Cost per $13,500........... $13,500........... $13,500........... $13,500.
Reporter.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is an additional annualized incremental burden of $50.9
million for capital and operation and maintenance (O&M) costs, which
reflects changes to applicability and monitoring. Including capital and
O&M costs, the total annual average burden is $92.3 million over the
next 3 years.
The total incremental burden and burden by reporter per subpart W
industry segment are shown in Table 7 of this preamble.
[[Page 50370]]
Table 7--Total Incremental Burden by Industry Segment and by Reporter
[$2021/year] \a\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total annual
Industry segment Count of Labor costs \c\ Capital and O&M Total annual cost cost per
reporters \b\ (annualized) reporter
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production................... 777 $27,957,105 $36,301,841 $64,258,946 $82,701
Offshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production.................. 141 3,793 0 3,793 27
Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting....... 361 1,490,222 4,013,157 5,503,379 15,245
Onshore Natural Gas Processing................................. 515 8,768,994 3,936,094 12,705,088 24,670
Onshore Natural Gas Transmission Compression................... 1,008 2,755,614 6,028,399 8,784,013 8,714
Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline.............................. 53 87,596 187 87,783 1,656
Underground Natural Gas Storage................................ 68 167,324 417,348 584,673 8,598
LNG Import and Export Equipment................................ 11 4,605 18,649 23,254 2,114
LNG Storage.................................................... 7 14,714 20,953 35,667 5,095
Natural Gas Distribution....................................... 164 163,069 161,370 324,439 1,978
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total...................................................... 3,077 41,413,037 50,897,998 92,311,035 30,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes estimated increase in costs following implementation of revisions in RY2025.
\b\ Counts are based on GHGRP data reported in RY2020 and 567 new facilities, as detailed in the memorandum, Assessment of Burden Impacts for Proposed
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule Revisions for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems.
\c\ Initial year and subsequent year labor costs are $41.4 million per year.
A full discussion of the cost and emission impacts may be found in
the memorandum, Assessment of Burden Impacts for Proposed Greenhouse
Gas Reporting Rule Revisions for Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems
available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2023-0234. The EPA is requesting comment on the assumptions and
methodology used in this memorandum.
The national costs of the proposed rule reflect the fact that there
are a large number of affected entities, but per entity costs are low.
To further assess the economic impacts of the proposed rule, the EPA
conducted a screening analysis comparing the estimated total annualized
compliance costs for the petroleum and natural gas systems industry
segments with industry mean cost-to-revenue ratios based on the total
facility costs that are applicable to parent entities in each segment.
This analysis shows that the per-entity impacts within each industry
segment are low. These low mean cost-to-revenue ratios indicate that
the proposed rule is unlikely to result in significant changes in
parent entity production decisions or other choices that would result
in significant fluctuations in prices or quantities in affected
markets.
Table 8--Mean CRRs for Parent Entities by Industry Segment, All Business
Sizes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mean CRR (standard
Industry segment error)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Onshore petroleum and natural gas production... 0.87% (0.81-0.92%)
Offshore petroleum and natural gas production.. 0.06% (0.04-0.09%)
Onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and 0.41% (0.33-0.48%)
boosting......................................
Onshore natural gas processing................. 0.50% (0.37-0.63%)
Onshore natural gas transmission compression... 0.09% (0.06-0.12%)
Onshore natural gas transmission pipeline...... 0.07% (0.05-0.10%)
Underground natural gas storage................ 0.07% (0.05-0.09%)
LNG import and export equipment................ 0.01% (0.00-0.01%)
LNG storage.................................... 0.00% (0.00-0.00%)
Natural gas distribution....................... 0.08% (0.05-0.10%)
All segments................................... 0.60% (0.55-0.64%)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CRR = cost-to-revenue ratio.
The EPA also evaluated the mean costs to individual facilities and
mean costs to parents (accounting for multiple owned facilities) for
reporters (shown in Table 9 of this preamble), which are relatively
small given the high revenues of parent companies within the petroleum
and natural gas systems sector. There are currently 2,322 existing
facilities reporting to subpart W that are owned by approximately 600
parent entities. Based on a review of revenue data available for
approximately 585 parent entities, the proposed rule costs represent
less than one percent of the total annual revenue for entities that
would be reporting under subpart W.
[[Page 50371]]
Table 9--Estimated Mean Costs and Revenues for Facility and Parent
Entities, All Segments
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated values (95%
Metric confidence interval)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mean cost to parent entity per facility $21.7 ($21.5-$21.8).
(thousands).
Mean number of facilities owned per parent 4.9 (4.4-5.4).
Mean cost to parent for all associated $105.7 ($100.8-$110.7).
facilities (thousands).
Mean parent entity revenue (billions)..... $5.18 ($4.59-$5.77).
Total revenue for all subpart W parents $3.89 ($3.45-$4.33).
(trillions).
Mean CRR for parent entities, using all 0.60% (0.55-0.64%).
facility costs.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Because parent revenues are heavily skewed towards higher
revenues, the ratio of mean cost to mean revenue (which is
approximately 0.002%) differs substantially from the mean cost-to-
revenue ratio (which is approximately 0.60%).
The EPA has also considered the potential benefits of the proposed
amendments to subpart W. Because this is a proposed reporting rule, the
EPA did not quantify estimated emission reductions or monetize the
benefits from such reductions that could be associated with this
proposed action. The benefits of the proposed amendments are based on
their relevance to policy making, transparency, and market efficiency.
The proposed amendments to the reporting system for petroleum and
natural gas systems would benefit policymakers and the public by
increasing the completeness and accuracy of facility emissions data.
Public data on emissions allows for accountability of emitters to the
public. Improved facility-specific emissions data would aid local,
state, and national policymakers as they evaluate and consider future
climate change policy decisions and other policy decisions for criteria
pollutants, ambient air quality standards, and toxic air emissions. The
benefits of improved reporting of petroleum and natural gas systems GHG
emissions to government also include enhancing existing programs, such
as the Natural Gas STAR Program, that provide significant benefits,
such as identifying cost-effective technologies and practices to reduce
emissions of CH4 from operations in all of the major industry sectors--
production, gathering and processing, transmission, and distribution.
The Natural Gas STAR program leverages GHGRP reporting data to track
partner petroleum and natural gas company activities related to their
Methane Challenge commitments. The proposed changes to subpart W would
increase knowledge of the location and magnitude of significant CH4
emissions sources in the petroleum and natural gas industry, and
associated activities and technologies, which can result in
improvements in technologies and the identification of new emissions
reducing technologies.
Benefits to industry of improved GHG emissions monitoring and
reporting under the proposed amendments include the value of having
verifiable empirical data to present to the public to demonstrate
appropriate environmental stewardship, and a better understanding of
their emission levels and sources to identify opportunities to reduce
emissions. The EPA also anticipates that improvements to monitoring and
implementation of empirical measurement methods would result in
emissions reductions. Based on activity data used to inform the U.S.
GHG Inventory, the EPA estimated approximately 403.4 billion cubic feet
of fugitive CH4 emissions (including fugitive leaks, venting, and
flaring) in 2021, representing a potential loss of over $871 million
\134\ to industry. To the extent that more frequent monitoring helps to
identify and mitigate emissions from leakage, a robust reporting
program based on empirical data can help industry and achieve and
disseminate their environmental achievements. Businesses and other
innovators can use the data to determine and track their GHG
footprints, find cost-saving efficiencies that reduce GHG emissions and
save product, and foster technologies to protect public health and the
environment. to reduce costs associated with fugitive emissions. Such
monitoring also allows for inclusion of standardized GHG data into
environmental management systems, providing the necessary information
to track actual company performance and to achieve and disseminate
their environmental achievements. Once facilities invest in the
institutional knowledge and systems to monitor and report emissions,
the cost of monitoring should fall and the accuracy of the accounting
should continue to improve. The proposed amendments would continue to
allow for facilities to benchmark themselves against similar facilities
to understand better their relative standing within their industry and
achieve and disseminate information about their environmental
performance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\134\ Based on natural gas prices from EIA (current monthly
average, April 2023). See https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/hist/rngwhhdm.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, transparent public data on emissions allows for
accountability of polluters to the public who bear the cost of the
pollution. The GHGRP serves as a powerful data resource and provides a
critical tool for communities to identify nearby sources of GHGs and
provide information to state and local governments. GHGRP data are
easily accessible to the public via the EPA's online data publication
tool, also known as FLIGHT (Facility Level Information on Greenhouse
gases Tool) at: https://ghgdata.epa.gov/ghgp/main.do. FLIGHT is
designed for the general public and allows users to view and sort GHG
data from over 8,000 entities in a variety of ways including by
location, industrial sector, and type of GHG emitted, and includes
demographic data. Although the emissions reported to the EPA by
reporting facilities are global pollutants, many of these facilities
also release pollutants that have a more direct and local impact in the
surrounding communities. Citizens, community groups, and labor unions
have made use of public pollutant release data to negotiate directly
with emitters to lower emissions, avoiding the need for additional
regulatory action.
The proposed amendments would improve the quality and transparency
of this reported data to affected communities, for example, by
providing data on other large release events. The proposed
disaggregation of reporting requirements within the Onshore Petroleum
and Natural Gas Production and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting industry segments to at least the well-pad and
gathering boosting site-level, respectively, would provide communities
with more localized information on GHG emissions from these segments.
Therefore, while the EPA has not quantified the benefits of the
proposed amendments to subpart W, the agency believes that they would
be substantial and justify the estimated costs, if finalized as
proposed. In
[[Page 50372]]
addition, the focus on empirical data that is the foundation of this
proposed rule was mandated by Congress in the IRA.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is a ``significant regulatory action'' as defined in
Executive Order 12866, as amended by Executive Order 14094.
Accordingly, the EPA submitted this action to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for Executive Order 12866 review. Documentation of any
changes made in response to the Executive Order 12866 review is
available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2023-0234. The EPA prepared an analysis of the potential impacts
associated with this action. This analysis, Assessment of Burden
Impacts for Proposed Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule Revisions for
Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems, is also available in the docket to
this rulemaking and is briefly summarized in section VI of this
preamble.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection activities in this proposed rule have
been submitted for approval to the OMB under the PRA. The ICR document
that the EPA prepared has been assigned OMB No. 2060-NEW (EPA ICR
number 2774.01). You can find a copy of the ICR in the docket for this
rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234, and it is briefly
summarized here.
The EPA estimates that the proposed amendments would result in an
increase in burden. The burden associated with the proposed rule is due
to revisions that would expand reporting to include new emission
sources or that expand the industry segments covered by existing
emissions sources and that may impact the facilities that are required
to report to subpart W; revisions to emissions calculation
methodologies that would require additional monitoring; and revisions
to collect additional data to more accurately reflect and verify total
CH4 emissions in reports submitted to the GHGRP or to
provide information for future implementation of the waste emissions
charge under CAA section 136. As a result of these proposed revisions,
567 new sources are expected to become subject to subpart W. Labor and
O&M costs are included for those new sources to comply with the
reporting and recordkeeping costs detailed in EPA ICR No. 2300.18, as
well as costs to comply with these proposed revisions.
The estimated annual average burden is 417,821 hours and $92.3
million over the 3 years covered by this information collection.
Further information on the EPA's assessment on the impact on burden can
be found in the memorandum, Assessment of Burden Impacts for Proposed
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule Revisions for Petroleum and Natural Gas
Systems, in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2023-0234.
Respondents/affected entities: Owners and operators of petroleum
and natural gas systems that must report their GHG emissions and other
data to the EPA to comply with 40 CFR part 98.
Respondent's obligation to respond: The respondent's obligation to
respond is mandatory under the authority provided in CAA sections 114
and 136.
Estimated number of respondents: 3,077 (affected by proposed
amendments).
Frequency of response: Annually.
Total estimated burden: 417,821 hours (per year). Burden is defined
at 5 CFR 1320.3(b).
Total estimated cost: $92.3 million, includes $50.9 million
annualized capital or operation & maintenance costs.
An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for the
EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.
Submit your comments on the Agency's need for this information, the
accuracy of the provided burden estimates and any suggested methods for
minimizing respondent burden to the EPA using the docket identified at
the beginning of this rulemaking. You may also send your ICR-related
comments to OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs using
the interface at https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain. Find this
particular information collection by selecting ``Currently under
Review--Open for Public Comments'' or by using the search function. OMB
must receive comments no later than October 2, 2023. The EPA will
respond to any ICR-related comments in the final rule.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this proposed action would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
RFA. The small entities subject to the requirements of this action are
small businesses in the petroleum and natural gas industry. Small
entities include small businesses, small organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions. The EPA has determined that some small
entities are affected because their production processes emit GHGs that
must be reported.
In the implementation of the GHGRP, the EPA previously determined
thresholds that reduced the number of small businesses reporting. The
proposed revisions would not revise the threshold for existing subpart
W reporters, therefore, we do not expect a significant number of small
entities would be newly impacted under the proposed rule revisions.
The proposed rule amendments predominantly apply to existing
reporters and are amendments that would expand reporting to include new
emission sources; add, remove, or refine emissions estimation
methodologies to improve the accuracy and transparency of reported
emission data; for the Onshore Natural Gas Production and Onshore
Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting segments, revise reporting of
emissions from a basin level to a site level; implement requirements to
collect new or revised data; clarify or update provisions that have
been misinterpreted; or streamline or simplify requirements by
increasing flexibility for reporters or removing redundant
requirements.
The EPA conducted a small entity analysis that assessed the costs
and impacts to small entities, including: (1) Revisions to add new
emissions sources and expand the industry segments covered by existing
emissions sources, (2) changes to improve existing monitoring or
calculation methodologies, and (3) revisions to reporting and
recordkeeping requirements for data provided to the program. The Agency
anticipates that although a subset of small reporters (108-116) have a
cost-to-revenue ratio (CRR) >1%, there are only a limited number (29-
30) of very small entities (1-19 employees) that would be likely to
have significant impacts with CRR >3%, reflecting only a small
proportion of the affected small entities (2.0%-5.2%). The mean CRR for
these very small entities (1-19 employees) is estimated to be between
1.55% (1.46-1.64%) and 2.06% (1.77-2.34%) based on the incremental
costs for existing reporting entities and between 2.35% (2.16-2.55%)
and 3.12% (2.59-3.66%) based on the costs for newly reporting
entities.\135\ Details of this analysis are
[[Page 50373]]
presented in the memorandum, Assessment of Burden Impacts for Proposed
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule Revisions for Petroleum and Natural Gas
Systems, available in the docket for this rulemaking, Docket Id. No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0234. Based on the results of this analysis, we have
concluded that this proposed action is not likely to have a significant
regulatory burden for a substantial number of directly regulated small
entities and thus that this proposed action would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The EPA continues to conduct significant outreach on the GHGRP and
maintains an ``open door'' policy for stakeholders to help inform the
EPA's understanding of key issues for the industries. We continue to be
interested in the potential impacts of the proposed rule amendments on
small entities and welcome comments on issues related to such impacts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\135\ The EPA conducted a multi-level analysis to estimate mean
CRRs for multiple scenarios. The mean CRR and associated 95-percent
confidence intervals provide an estimate of the range of cost-to-
sales ratios expected to apply to affected very small entities that
would be expected in the total population.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain an unfunded mandate of $100 million or
more as described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The action in part
implements mandate(s) specifically and explicitly set forth in CAA
section 136.
This proposed rule does not apply to governmental entities unless
the government entity owns a facility in the petroleum and gas industry
that directly emits GHG above part 98 applicability threshold levels.
It does not impose any implementation responsibilities on state, local,
or tribal governments and it is not expected to increase the cost of
existing regulatory programs managed by those governments. Thus, the
impact on governments affected by the proposed rule is expected to be
minimal.
However, consistent with the EPA's policy to promote communications
between the EPA and state and local governments, the EPA sought
comments from small governments concerning the regulatory requirements
that might significantly or uniquely affect them in the development of
this proposed rule. Specifically, the EPA previously published an RFI
seeking public comment in a non-regulatory docket to collect responses
to a range of questions related to the Methane Emissions Reduction
Program, including subpart W revisions (see Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2022-0875). The EPA received two comments from government entities
supporting the use of empirical data and improvements to the accuracy
of calculation methods under subpart W; these comments were considered
during the development of the proposed rule. The EPA continues to be
interested in the potential impacts of the proposed rule amendments on
state, local, or tribal governments and welcomes comments on issues
related to such impacts.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government. This
proposed rule does not apply to governmental entities unless the
government entity owns a facility in the petroleum and gas industry
(e.g., an LDC) that directly emits GHG above part 98 applicability
threshold levels. Therefore, the EPA anticipates relatively few state
or local government facilities would be affected. However, consistent
with the EPA's policy to promote communications between the EPA and
state and local governments, the EPA specifically solicits comment on
this proposed action from state and local officials.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action has tribal implications. However, it will neither
impose substantial direct compliance costs on federally recognized
Tribal governments, nor preempt tribal law. This regulation will apply
directly to petroleum and natural gas facilities that may be owned by
tribal governments that emit GHGs. However, it will generally only have
tribal implications where the tribal entity owns a facility that
directly emits GHGs above threshold levels; therefore, relatively few
tribal facilities would be affected. Of the subpart W facilities
currently reporting to the GHGRP in RY2021, we identified four
facilities currently reporting to part 98 that are owned by one tribal
parent company.
In addition to tribes that would be directly impacted by the
proposed revisions due to owning a facility subject to the proposed
requirements, the EPA anticipates that tribes could be impacted in
cases where facilities subject to the proposed revisions are located on
Tribal land. In particular, the EPA reviewed the location of the
production wells reported by facilities under the Onshore Petroleum and
Natural Gas Production segment and found production wells reported
under subpart W on lands associated with approximately 20 tribes.
Therefore, although the EPA anticipates that only one tribe would be
subject to the rule, the EPA has sought opportunities to provide
information to tribal governments and representatives during rule
development. On November 4, 2022, the EPA published an RFI seeking
public comment on a range of questions related to the Methane Emissions
Reduction Program, including subpart W revisions (see Docket Id. No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2022-0875). The EPA received one comment from a tribal
entity relevant to subpart W. The commenter supported the use of
empirical data and improvements to the accuracy of calculation methods
under subpart W, including the use of advanced CH4 detection
technologies for leak surveys at well sites and compressor stations;
these comments were considered during the development of the proposed
rule. Further, consistent with the EPA Policy on Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribes, the EPA will engage in consultation
with Tribal officials during the development of this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive order. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern an environmental
health risk or safety risk.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not a ``significant energy action'' because it is
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution or use of energy. The proposed amendments would expand
reporting to include new emission sources; add, remove, or refine
emissions estimation methodologies improve the accuracy and
transparency of reported emission data; for the Onshore Natural Gas
Production and Onshore Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting segments,
revise reporting of
[[Page 50374]]
emissions from a basin level to a site level; implement requirements to
collect new or revised data; clarify or update provisions that have
been misinterpreted; or streamline or simplify requirements by
increasing flexibility for reporters or removing redundant
requirements. We are also proposing revisions that streamline or
simplify requirements or alleviate burden through revision,
simplification, or removal of certain calculation, monitoring,
recordkeeping, or reporting requirements. In general, these changes
would not have a significant, adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. In addition, the EPA is proposing
confidentiality determinations for new and revised data elements
proposed in this rulemaking and for certain existing data elements for
which a confidentiality determination has not previously been proposed.
These proposed amendments and confidentiality determinations do not
make any changes to the existing monitoring, calculation, and reporting
requirements under subpart W and are not likely to have a significant
adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use of energy.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act and 1 CFR Part 51
This action involves technical standards. For facilities that
conduct a performance test to calculate combustion slip, the EPA is
proposing that the performance test would be conducted in accordance
with one of the test methods in proposed 40 CFR 98.234(i), which
include EPA Methods 18 and 320 as well as an alternate method, ASTM
D6348-12. The EPA is proposing to allow the use of the alternate method
ASTM D6348-12, which is based on the use of a Fourier transform
infrared (FTIR) spectrometer for the identification and quantification
of multicomponent gaseous compounds, in lieu of EPA Method 320. The EPA
currently allows for the use of an earlier version of this method, ASTM
D6348-03, under other subparts of part 98, including subparts I
(Electronics Manufacturing), V (Nitric Acid Production), and OO
(Fluorinated Gas Production), for the quantification of other GHGs.
Therefore, the EPA is proposing to allow ASTM D6348-12 to be used in
subpart W to quantify CH4 emissions from combustion slip.
Anyone may access the standards on the ASTM website (https://www.astm.org/) for additional information. These standards are
available to everyone at a cost determined by the ASTM ($76). The ASTM
also offers memberships or subscriptions that allow unlimited access to
their methods. The cost of obtaining these methods is not a significant
financial burden, making the methods reasonably available for
reporters. The EPA will also make a copy of these documents available
in hard copy at the appropriate EPA office (see the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information) for
review purposes only.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
The EPA anticipates that the human health or environmental risk
addressed by this action will not have potential disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority,
low-income or indigenous populations as it does not directly affect the
level of protection provided to human health or the environment because
it is a rule addressing information collection and reporting
procedures.
However, the data that would be collected through this action would
provide an important data resource for communities and the public to
understand GHG emissions. Since facilities would be required to use
prescribed calculation and monitoring methods, emissions data can be
compared and analyzed, including locations of emissions sources. GHGRP
data are easily accessible to the public via the EPA's online data
publication tool, also known as FLIGHT at: https://ghgdata.epa.gov/ghgp/main.do. FLIGHT is designed for the general public and allows
users to view and sort GHG data for every reporting year starting with
2010 from over 8,000 entities in a variety of ways including by
location, industrial sector, and type of GHG emitted. This powerful
data resource provides a critical tool for communities to identify
nearby sources of GHGs and provide information to state and local
governments.
The proposed revisions to part 98 include requirements for
reporting of GHG data from additional emission sources (other large
release events, nitrogen removal units, produced water tanks, crankcase
venting, and mud degassing), improvements to emissions calculation
methodologies, and collection of data to support verification of GHG
emissions and transparency. The proposed disaggregation of reporting
requirements within the Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production
and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Gathering and Boosting industry
segments to at least the well-pad and gathering boosting site-level,
respectively, and the required reporting of geographical coordinates
for other large release events would provide communities with more
localized information on GHG emissions from these segments.
Overall, these revisions would improve the quality of the data
collected under the program and available to communities, if finalized.
K. Determination Under CAA Section 307(d)
Pursuant to CAA section 307(d)(1)(V), the Administrator determines
that this action is subject to the provisions of CAA section 307(d).
Section 307(d)(1)(V) of the CAA provides that the provisions of CAA
section 307(d) apply to ``such other actions as the Administrator may
determine.''
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 98
Environmental protection, Greenhouse gases, Incorporation by
reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Michael S. Regan,
Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Environmental
Protection Agency proposes to amend title 40, chapter I, of the Code of
Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 98--MANDATORY GREENHOUSE GAS REPORTING
0
1. The authority citation for part 98 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Subpart A--General Provision
0
2. Amend Sec. 98.1 by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 98.1 Purpose and scope.
* * * * *
(c) For facilities required to report under onshore petroleum and
natural gas production under subpart W of this part, the terms Owner
and Operator used in this subpart have the same definition as Onshore
petroleum and natural gas production owner or operator, as defined in
Sec. 98.238. For facilities required to report under onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting under subpart W of this part,
the terms Owner and Operator used in this subpart have the same
definition as Gathering and boosting system owner or operator, as
defined in Sec. 98.238. For facilities required to report under
onshore natural gas transmission pipeline under subpart W of this part,
the terms Owner and
[[Page 50375]]
Operator used in this subpart have the same definition as Onshore
natural gas transmission pipeline owner or operator, as defined in
Sec. 98.238.
0
3. Amend Sec. 98.2 by revising paragraph (i)(3) to read as follows:
Sec. 98.2 Who must report?
* * * * *
(i) * * *
(3) If the operations of a facility or supplier are changed such
that all applicable processes and operations subject to paragraphs
(a)(1) through (4) of this section cease to operate, then the owner or
operator may discontinue complying with this part for the reporting
years following the year in which cessation of such operations occurs,
provided that the owner or operator submits a notification to the
Administrator that announces the cessation of reporting and certifies
to the closure of all applicable processes and operations no later than
March 31 of the year following such changes. If one or more processes
or operations subject to paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this section
at a facility or supplier cease to operate, but not all applicable
processes or operations cease to operate, then the owner or operator is
exempt from reporting for any such processes or operations in the
reporting years following the reporting year in which cessation of the
process or operation occurs, provided that the owner or operator
submits a notification to the Administrator that announces the
cessation of reporting for the process or operation no later than March
31 following the first reporting year in which the process or operation
has ceased for an entire reporting year. Cessation of operations in the
context of underground coal mines includes, but is not limited to,
abandoning and sealing the facility. This paragraph (i)(3) does not
apply to seasonal or other temporary cessation of operations. This
paragraph (i)(3) does not apply to the municipal solid waste landfills
source category (subpart HH of this part), or the industrial waste
landfills source category (subpart TT of this part). This paragraph
(i)(3) does not apply when there is a change in the owner or operator
for facilities in industry segments with a unique definition of
facility as defined in Sec. 98.238 of the petroleum and natural gas
systems source category (subpart W of this part), unless the changes
result in permanent cessation of all applicable processes and
operations. The owner or operator must resume reporting for any future
calendar year during which any of the GHG-emitting processes or
operations resume operation.
* * * * *
0
4. Amend Sec. 98.4 by revising the first sentence of paragraph (h) and
adding paragraph (n) to read as follows:
Sec. 98.4 Authorization and responsibilities of the designated
representative.
* * * * *
(h) Changes in owners and operators. Except as provided in
paragraph (n) of this section, in the event an owner or operator of the
facility or supplier is not included in the list of owners and
operators in the certificate of representation under this section for
the facility or supplier, such owner or operator shall be deemed to be
subject to and bound by the certificate of representation, the
representations, actions, inactions, and submissions of the designated
representative and any alternate designated representative of the
facility or supplier, as if the owner or operator were included in such
list. * * *
* * * * *
(n) Alternative provisions for changes in owners and operators for
industry segments with a unique definition of facility as defined in
Sec. 98.238. When there is a change to the owner or operator of a
facility required to report under the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production, natural gas distribution, onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting, or onshore natural gas transmission pipeline
industry segments of subpart W of this part, or a change to the owner
or operator for some emission sources from the facility in one of these
industry segments, the provisions specified in paragraphs (n)(1)
through (4) of this section apply for the respective type of change in
owner or operator. The provisions specified in paragraph (n)(5) of this
section apply to the types of change in owner or operator specified in
paragraphs (n)(3) and (4) of this section.
(1) If the entire facility is acquired by an owner or operator that
does not already have a reporting facility in the same industry segment
and basin (for onshore petroleum and natural gas production or onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting) or state (for natural
gas distribution), then within 90 days after the change in the owner or
operator, the designated representative or any alternate designated
representative shall submit a certificate of representation that is
complete under this section. If the new owner or operator already had
emission sources specified in Sec. 98.232(c), (i), (j) or (m), as
applicable, prior to the acquisition in the same basin (for onshore
petroleum and natural gas production or onshore petroleum and natural
gas gathering and boosting) or state (for natural gas distribution) as
the acquired facility but had not previously met the applicability
requirements in Sec. Sec. 98.2(a) and 98.231, then per the applicable
definition of facility in Sec. 98.238, the previously owned applicable
emission sources must be included in the acquired facility. The new
owner or operator and the new designated representative shall be
responsible for submitting the annual report for the facility for the
entire reporting year beginning with the reporting year in which the
acquisition occurred. The new owner or operator and the new designated
representative shall also be responsible for submitting any required
annual GHG report revisions required by Sec. 98.3(h) for reporting
years prior to the reporting year in which the acquisition occurred.
(2) If the entire facility is acquired by an owner or operator that
already has a reporting facility in the same industry segment and basin
(for onshore petroleum and natural gas production or onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting) or state (for natural gas
distribution), the new owner or operator shall merge the acquired
facility with their existing facility for purposes of the annual GHG
report. Within 90 days after the change in the owner or operator, the
designated representative or any alternate designated representative
shall submit a certificate of representation that is complete under
this section to reflect the new owner or operator for the acquired
facility. The owner or operator shall also follow the provisions of
Sec. 98.2(i)(6) to notify EPA that the acquired facility will
discontinue reporting and shall provide the e-GGRT identification
number of the merged, or reconstituted, facility. The owner or operator
of the merged facility shall be responsible for submitting the annual
report for the merged facility for the entire reporting year beginning
with the reporting year in which the acquisition occurred. The new
owner or operator and the new designated representative shall also be
responsible for submitting any required annual GHG report revisions
required by Sec. 98.3(h) for reporting years prior to the reporting
year in which the acquisition occurred.
(3) If only some emission sources from the facility are acquired by
one or more new owners or operators, the existing owner or operator
(i.e., the owner or operator of the portion of the facility that is not
sold) shall continue to report under subpart W of this part for the
retained emission sources unless
[[Page 50376]]
and until that facility meets one of the criteria in Sec. 98.2(i).
Each owner or operator that acquires emission sources from the facility
must account for those acquired emission sources according to paragraph
(n)(3)(i) or (ii) of this section, as applicable.
(i) If the purchasing owner or operator that acquires only some of
the emission sources from the existing facility does not already have a
reporting facility in the same industry segment and basin (for onshore
petroleum and natural gas production or onshore petroleum and natural
gas gathering and boosting) or state (for natural gas distribution),
the purchasing owner or operator shall begin reporting as a new
facility. The new facility must include the acquired emission sources
specified in Sec. 98.232(c), (i), (j), or (m), as applicable, and any
emission sources the purchasing owner or operator already owned in the
same industry segment and basin (for onshore petroleum and natural gas
production or onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting)
or state (for natural gas distribution). The designated representative
for the new facility must be selected by the purchasing owner or
operator according to the schedule and procedure specified in
paragraphs (b) through (d) of this section. The purchasing owner or
operator shall be responsible for submitting the annual report for the
new facility for the entire reporting year beginning with the reporting
year in which the acquisition occurred. The purchasing owner or
operator shall continue to report under subpart W of this part for the
new facility unless and until that facility meets one of the criteria
in Sec. 98.2(i).
(ii) If the purchasing owner or operator that acquires only some of
the emission sources from the existing facility already has a reporting
facility in the same industry segment and basin (for onshore petroleum
and natural gas production or onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting) or state (for natural gas distribution), then
per the applicable definition of facility in Sec. 98.238, the
purchasing owner or operator must add the acquired emission sources
specified in Sec. 98.232(c), (i), (j), or (m), as applicable, to their
existing facility for purposes of reporting under subpart W. The
purchasing owner or operator shall be responsible for submitting the
annual report for the entire facility, including the acquired emission
sources, for the entire reporting year beginning with the reporting
year in which the acquisition occurred.
(4) If all the emission sources from a reporting facility are sold
to multiple owners or operators within the same reporting year, such
that the current owner or operator of the existing facility does not
retain any of the emission sources, then the current owner or operator
of the existing facility shall notify EPA within 90 days of the last
transaction that all of the facility's emission sources were acquired
by multiple purchasers, including the identity of the purchasers. Each
owner or operator that acquires emission sources from a facility shall
account for those sources according to paragraph (n)(3)(i) or (ii) of
this section, as applicable.
(5) Within 90 days of a transaction that results in a change to the
owner or operator of a facility as described in paragraph (n)(3) or (4)
of this section, the owners or operators involved in that transaction
shall select a historic reporting representative who will be
responsible for revisions to annual GHG reports under Sec. 98.3(h) for
reporting years prior to the reporting year in which the transaction
occurred. The historic reporting representative shall be an individual
selected by an agreement binding on each of the owners and operators
involved in the transaction, following the provisions of paragraph (b)
of this section. The provisions of paragraphs (b), (c), (e), and (g) of
this section apply to the historic reporting representative by
substituting the term ``historic reporting representative'' for
``designated representative.'' The provisions of paragraph (i) of this
section apply to the historic reporting representative by adding the
term ``historic reporting representative'' to instances of ``the
designated representative and any alternate designated
representative.''
0
5. Amend Sec. 98.6 by revising the definitions for ``Dehydrator'',
``Dehydrator vent emissions'', ``Desiccant'', and ``Vapor recovery
system'' to read as follows:
Sec. 98.6 Definitions.
* * * * *
Dehydrator means a device in which a liquid absorbent (including
ethylene glycol, diethylene glycol, or triethylene glycol) or desiccant
directly contacts a natural gas stream to remove water vapor.
Dehydrator vent emissions means natural gas and CO2 released from a
natural gas dehydrator system absorbent (typically glycol) regenerator
still vent and, if present, a flash tank separator, to the atmosphere,
flare, regenerator fire-box/fire tubes, or vapor recovery system.
Emissions include stripping natural gas and motive natural gas used in
absorbent circulation pumps.
* * * * *
Desiccant means a material used in solid-bed dehydrators to remove
water from raw natural gas by adsorption or absorption. Desiccants
include, but are not limited to, molecular sieves, activated alumina,
pelletized calcium chloride, lithium chloride and granular silica gel
material. Wet natural gas is passed through a bed of the granular or
pelletized solid adsorbent or absorbent in these dehydrators. As the
wet gas contacts the surface of the particles of desiccant material,
water is adsorbed on the surface or absorbed and dissolves the surface
of these desiccant particles. Passing through the entire desiccant bed,
almost all of the water is adsorbed onto or absorbed into the desiccant
material, leaving the dry gas to exit the contactor.
* * * * *
Vapor recovery system means any equipment located at the source of
potential gas emissions to the atmosphere or to a flare, that is
composed of piping, connections, and, if necessary, flow-inducing
devices, and that is used for routing the gas back into the process as
a product and/or fuel. For purposes of Sec. 98.233, routing emissions
from a dehydrator regenerator still vent or flash tank separator vent
to a regenerator fire-box/fire tubes does not meet the definition of
vapor recovery system.
* * * * *
0
6. Amend Sec. 98.7 by adding paragraph (e)(53) to read as follows:
Sec. 98.7 What standardized methods are incorporated by reference
into this part?
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(53) ASTM D6348-12 Standard Test Method for Determination of
Gaseous Compounds by Extractive Direct Interface Fourier Transform
Infrared (FTIR) Spectroscopy, IBR approved for Sec. 98.234(j).
* * * * *
Subpart C--General Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources
0
7. Amend Sec. 98.33 by revising parameter ``EF'' of Equation C-8 in
paragraph (c)(1) introductory text, Equation C-8a in paragraph
(c)(1)(i), Equation C-8b in paragraph (c)(1)(ii), Equation C-9a in
paragraph (c)(2), and Equation C-10 in paragraph (c)(4) introductory
text to read as follows:
Sec. 98.33 Calculating GHG emissions.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
[[Page 50377]]
Where: * * *
EF = Fuel-specific default emission factor for CH4 or
N2O, from Table C-2 of this subpart (kg CH4 or
N2O per mmBtu), except for natural gas-fired
reciprocating internal combustion engines and gas turbines at
facilities subject to subpart W of this part, which must use a
CH4 emission factor determined in accordance with Sec.
98.233(z)(4).
* * * * *
(i) * * *
Where: * * *
EF = Fuel-specific default emission factor for CH4 or
N2O, from Table C-2 of this subpart (kg CH4 or
N2O per mmBtu), except for natural gas-fired
reciprocating internal combustion engines and gas turbines at
facilities subject to subpart W of this part, which must use a
CH4 emission factor determined in accordance with Sec.
98.233(z)(4).
* * * * *
(ii) * * *
Where: * * *
EF = Fuel-specific default emission factor for CH4 or
N2O, from Table C-2 of this subpart (kg CH4 or
N2O per mmBtu), except for natural gas-fired
reciprocating internal combustion engines and gas turbines at
facilities subject to subpart W of this part, which must use a
CH4 emission factor determined in accordance with Sec.
98.233(z)(4).
* * * * *
(2) * * *
Where: * * *
EF = Fuel-specific default emission factor for CH4 or
N2O, from Table C-2 of this subpart (kg CH4 or
N2O per mmBtu), except for natural gas-fired
reciprocating internal combustion engines and gas turbines at
facilities subject to subpart W of this part, which must use a
CH4 emission factor determined in accordance with Sec.
98.233(z)(4).
* * * * *
(4) * * *
Where: * * *
EF = Fuel-specific default emission factor for CH4 or
N2O, from Table C-2 of this subpart (kg CH4 or
N2O per mmBtu), except for natural gas-fired
reciprocating internal combustion engines and gas turbines at
facilities subject to subpart W of this part, which must use a
CH4 emission factor determined in accordance with Sec.
98.233(z)(4).
* * * * *
0
8. Amend Sec. 98.36 by adding paragraphs (b)(13), (c)(1)(xiii), and
(c)(3)(xiii) to read as follows:
Sec. 98.36 Data reporting requirements.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(13) For natural gas-fired reciprocating internal combustion
engines or gas turbines at facilities subject to subpart W of this
part, which must use a CH4 emission factor determined in
accordance with Sec. 98.233(z)(4), you must also report:
(i) Type of equipment: two-stroke lean-burn reciprocating internal
combustion engine, four-stroke lean-burn reciprocating internal
combustion engine, four-stroke rich-burn reciprocating internal
combustion engine, or gas turbine.
(ii) Method by which the CH4 emission factor was
determined: performance test, manufacturer data, or default emission
factor.
(iii) Value of the CH4 emission factor.
(c) * * *
(1) * * *
(xiii) For natural gas-fired reciprocating internal combustion
engines or gas turbines at facilities subject to subpart W of this
part, which must use a CH4 emission factor determined in
accordance with Sec. 98.233(z)(4), you must report the equipment type
(i.e., two-stroke lean-burn reciprocating internal combustion engine,
four-stroke lean-burn reciprocating internal combustion engine, four-
stroke rich-burn reciprocating internal combustion engine, and gas
turbine), the method by which the CH4 emission factor was
determined (i.e., performance test, manufacturer data, or default
emission factor), and the average value of the CH4 emission
factor.
* * * * *
(3) * * *
(xiii) For natural gas-fired reciprocating internal combustion
engines or gas turbines at facilities subject to subpart W of this
part, which must use a CH4 emission factor determined in
accordance with Sec. 98.233(z)(4), you must report the equipment type
(i.e., two-stroke lean-burn reciprocating internal combustion engine,
four-stroke lean-burn reciprocating internal combustion engine, four-
stroke rich-burn reciprocating internal combustion engine, and gas
turbine) the method by which the CH4 emission factor was
determined (i.e., performance test, manufacturer data, or default
emission factor), and the average value of the CH4 emission
factor.
* * * * *
0
9. Amend table C-2 to subpart C of part 98 by revising the entry
``Natural Gas'' to read as follows:
Table C-2 to Subpart C of Part 98--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)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
Natural Gas 1................... 1.0 x 10-03....... 1.0 x 10-04.
* * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
1 Reporters subject to subpart W of this part may only use the default
CH4 emission factor for natural gas-fired combustion units that are
not reciprocating internal combustion engines or gas turbines. For
natural gas-fired reciprocating internal combustion engines or gas
turbines, at facilities subject to subpart W of this part, reporters
must use a CH4 emission factor determined in accordance with Sec.
98.233(z)(4).
Subpart W--Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems
0
10. Amend Sec. 98.230 by revising paragraphs (a)(2), (3) and (9) to
read as follows:
Sec. 98.230 Definition of the source category.
(a) * * *
(2) Onshore petroleum and natural gas production. Onshore petroleum
and natural gas production means all equipment on a single well-pad or
associated with a single well-pad (including but not limited to
compressors, generators, dehydrators, storage vessels, engines,
boilers, heaters, flares, separation and processing equipment, and
portable non-self-propelled equipment, which includes well drilling and
completion equipment, workover equipment, and leased, rented or
contracted equipment) used in the production, extraction, recovery,
lifting, stabilization, separation or treating of petroleum and/or
natural gas (including condensate). This equipment also includes
associated storage or measurement vessels, all petroleum and natural
gas production equipment located on islands, artificial islands, or
structures connected by a causeway to land, an island, or an artificial
island. Onshore petroleum and natural gas production also means all
equipment on or associated with a single enhanced oil recovery (EOR)
well-pad using CO2 or natural gas injection.
(3) Onshore natural gas processing. Onshore natural gas processing
means the forced extraction of natural gas
[[Page 50378]]
liquids (NGLs) from field gas, fractionation of mixed NGLs to natural
gas products, or both. Natural gas processing does not include a Joule-
Thomson valve, a dew point depression valve, or an isolated or
standalone Joule-Thomson skid. This segment also includes all residue
gas compression equipment owned or operated by the natural gas
processing plant.
* * * * *
(9) Onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting.
Onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting means
gathering pipelines and other equipment used to collect petroleum and/
or natural gas from onshore production gas or oil wells and used to
compress, dehydrate, sweeten, or transport the petroleum and/or natural
gas to a natural gas processing facility, a natural gas transmission
pipeline or to a natural gas distribution pipeline. Gathering and
boosting equipment includes, but is not limited to gathering pipelines,
separators, compressors, acid gas removal units, dehydrators, pneumatic
devices/pumps, storage vessels, engines, boilers, heaters, and flares.
Gathering and boosting equipment does not include equipment reported
under any other industry segment defined in this section. Gathering
pipelines operating on a vacuum and gathering pipelines with a GOR less
than 300 standard cubic feet per stock tank barrel (scf/STB) are not
included in this industry segment (oil here refers to hydrocarbon
liquids of all API gravities).
* * * * *
0
11. Amend Sec. 98.232 by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a), (b) and (c)(2), (10), (17), and (21);
0
b. Adding paragraphs (c)(23) through (25);
0
c. Revising paragraphs (d)(5) and (7);
0
d. Adding paragraphs (d)(8) through (11);
0
e. Revising paragraphs (e)(3) and (8);
0
f. Adding paragraphs (e)(9) through (11);
0
g. Revising paragraphs (f)(6) and (8);
0
h. Adding paragraphs (f)(9) through (13);
0
i. Revising paragraphs (g)(6) and (7);
0
j. Adding paragraphs (g)(8) through (11);
0
k. Revising paragraphs (h)(7) and (8);
0
l. Adding paragraphs (h)(9) through (11) and (i)(8) through (11);
0
m. Revising paragraphs (j)(3), (6), and (10);
0
n. Adding paragraphs (j)(13) and (14);
0
o. Revising paragraph (m); and
0
p. Adding paragraph (n).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 98.232 GHGs to report.
(a) You must report CO2, CH4, and
N2O emissions from each industry segment specified in
paragraphs (b) through (j) and (m) of this section, CO2,
CH4, and N2O emissions from each flare as
specified in paragraphs (b) through (j) of this section, and stationary
and portable combustion emissions as applicable as specified in
paragraph (k) of this section. You must also report the information
specified in paragraphs (l) and (n) of this section, as applicable.
(b) For offshore petroleum and natural gas production, report
CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions from
equipment leaks, vented emission, and flare emission source types as
identified by Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) in compliance
with 30 CFR 550.302 through 304 and CO2 and CH4
emissions from other large release events. Offshore platforms do not
need to report portable emissions.
(c) * * *
(2) Blowdown vent stacks.
* * * * *
(10) Hydrocarbon liquids and produced water storage tank emissions.
* * * * *
(17) Acid gas removal unit vents and nitrogen removal unit vents.
* * * * *
(21) Equipment leaks listed in paragraph (c)(21)(i) or (ii) of this
section, as applicable:
(i) Equipment leaks from components including valves, connectors,
open ended lines, pressure relief valves, pumps, flanges, and other
components (such as instruments, loading arms, stuffing boxes,
compressor seals, dump lever arms, and breather caps, but does not
include components listed in paragraph (c)(11) or (19) of this section,
and it does not include thief hatches or other openings on a storage
vessel).
(ii) Equipment leaks from major equipment including wellheads,
separators, meters/piping, compressors, dehydrators, heaters, and
storage vessels.
* * * * *
(23) Other large release events.
(24) Drilling mud degassing.
(25) Crankcase vents.
(d) * * *
(5) Acid gas removal unit vents and nitrogen removal unit vents.
* * * * *
(7) Equipment leaks from valves, connectors, open ended lines,
pressure relief valves, and meters, and equipment leaks from all other
components in gas service (not including thief hatches or other
openings on storage vessels) that either are subject to equipment leak
standards for onshore natural gas processing plants in Sec. 60.5400b
of this chapter, or an applicable approved state plan or applicable
Federal plan in part 62 of this chapter or that you elect to survey
using a leak detection method described in Sec. 98.234(a).
(8) Natural gas pneumatic device venting.
(9) Other large release events.
(10) Hydrocarbon liquids and produced water storage tank emissions.
(11) Crankcase vents.
(e) * * *
(3) Condensate storage tanks.
* * * * *
(8) Equipment leaks from all other components that are not listed
in paragraph (e)(1), (2), or (7) of this section and either are subject
to the well site or compressor station fugitive emissions standards in
Sec. 60.5397a of this chapter, the fugitive emissions standards for
well sites, centralized production facilities, and compressor stations
in Sec. 60.5397b of this chapter, or an applicable approved state plan
or applicable Federal plan in part 62 of this chapter, or that you
elect to survey using a leak detection method described in Sec.
98.234(a). The other components subject to this paragraph (e)(8) also
do not include thief hatches or other openings on a storage vessel.
(9) Other large release events.
(10) Dehydrator vents.
(11) Crankcase vents.
(f) * * *
(6) Equipment leaks from all other components that are associated
with storage stations, are not listed in paragraph (f)(1), (2), or (5)
of this section, and either are subject to the well site or compressor
station fugitive emissions standards in Sec. 60.5397a of this chapter,
the fugitive emissions standards for well sites, centralized production
facilities, and compressor stations in Sec. 60.5397b of this chapter,
or an applicable approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in part
62 of this chapter or that you elect to survey using a leak detection
method described in Sec. 98.234(a). The other components subject to
this paragraph (f)(6) do not include thief hatches or other openings on
a storage vessel.
* * * * *
(8) Equipment leaks from all other components that are associated
with storage wellheads, are not listed in paragraph (f)(1), (2), or (7)
of this section, and either are subject to the well site or compressor
station fugitive emissions standards in Sec. 60.5397a of this chapter,
the fugitive emissions standards for well sites, centralized production
facilities, and compressor stations in Sec. 60.5397b of this chapter,
or
[[Page 50379]]
an applicable approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in part 62
of this chapter or that you elect to survey using a leak detection
method described in Sec. 98.234(a).
(9) Other large release events.
(10) Dehydrator vents.
(11) Blowdown vent stacks.
(12) Condensate storage tanks.
(13) Crankcase vents.
(g) * * *
(6) Equipment leaks from all components in gas service that are
associated with a vapor recovery compressor, are not listed in
paragraph (g)(1) or (2) of this section, and either are subject to the
well site or compressor station fugitive emissions standards in Sec.
60.5397a of this chapter, the fugitive emissions standards for well
sites, centralized production facilities, and compressor stations in
Sec. 60.5397b of this chapter, or an applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of this chapter or that you elect to
survey using a leak detection method described in Sec. 98.234(a).
(7) Equipment leaks from all components in gas service that are not
associated with a vapor recovery compressor, are not listed in
paragraph (g)(1) or (2) of this section, and either are subject to the
well site or compressor station fugitive emissions standards in Sec.
60.5397a of this chapter, the fugitive emissions standards for well
sites, centralized production facilities, and compressor stations in
Sec. 60.5397b of this chapter, or an applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of this chapter or that you elect to
survey using a leak detection method described in Sec. 98.234(a).
(8) Other large release events.
(9) Blowdown vent stacks.
(10) Acid gas removal unit vents and nitrogen removal unit vents.
(11) Crankcase vents.
(h) * * *
(7) Equipment leaks from all components in gas service that are
associated with a vapor recovery compressor, are not listed in
paragraph (h)(1) or (2) of this section, and either are subject to the
well site or compressor station fugitive emissions standards in Sec.
60.5397a of this chapter, the fugitive emissions standards for well
sites, centralized production facilities, and compressor stations in
Sec. 60.5397b of this chapter, or an applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of this chapter or that you elect to
survey using a leak detection method described in Sec. 98.234(a).
(8) Equipment leaks from all components in gas service that are not
associated with a vapor recovery compressor, are not listed in
paragraph (h)(1) or (2) of this section, and either are subject to the
well site or compressor station fugitive emissions standards in Sec.
60.5397a of this chapter, the fugitive emissions standards for well
sites, centralized production facilities, and compressor stations in
Sec. 60.5397b of this chapter, or an applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of this chapter or that you elect to
survey using a leak detection method described in Sec. 98.234(a).
(9) Acid gas removal unit vents and nitrogen removal unit vents.
(10) Other large release events.
(11) Crankcase vents.
(i) * * *
(8) Other large release events.
(9) Blowdown vent stacks.
(10) Natural gas pneumatic device venting.
(11) Crankcase vents.
(j) * * *
(3) Acid gas removal unit vents and nitrogen removal unit vents.
* * * * *
(6) Hydrocarbon liquids and produced water storage tank emissions.
* * * * *
(10) Equipment leaks listed in paragraph (j)(10)(i) or (ii) of this
section, as applicable:
(i) Equipment leaks from components including valves, connectors,
open ended lines, pressure relief valves, pumps, flanges, and other
components (such as instruments, loading arms, stuffing boxes,
compressor seals, dump lever arms, and breather caps, but does not
include components in paragraph (j)(8) or (9) of this section, and it
does not include thief hatches or other openings on a storage vessel).
(ii) Equipment leaks from major equipment including wellheads,
separators, meters/piping, compressors, dehydrators, heaters, and
storage vessels.
* * * * *
(13) Other large release events.
(14) Crankcase vents.
* * * * *
(m) For onshore natural gas transmission pipeline, report
CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions from the
following source types:
(1) Blowdown vent stacks.
(2) Other large release events.
(3) Equipment leaks at transmission company interconnect metering-
regulating stations.
(4) Equipment leaks at farm tap and/or direct sale metering-
regulating stations.
(5) Transmission pipeline equipment leaks.
(n) For all facilities meeting the applicability provisions under
Sec. 98.2 and, if applicable, Sec. 98.231, report the information
required under subpart B of this part (Metered, Non-fuel, Purchased
Energy Consumption by Stationary Sources).
0
12. Amend Sec. 98.233 by:
0
a. Revising paragraphs (a), (c), (d), (e) introductory text, (e)(1)
introductory text, (e)(1)(i), (ii), (x), and (xi), and (e)(2)
introductory text;
0
b. Revising parameter ``Count'' of Equation W-5 in paragraph (e)(2);
0
c. Revising paragraph (e)(3) introductory text;
0
d. Removing paragraph (e)(4);
0
e. Redesignating paragraphs (e)(5) and (6) as (e)(4) and (5),
respectively;
0
f. Revising newly redesignated paragraphs (e)(4) and (5) and paragraphs
(f), (g) introductory text, and (g)(1) introductory text;
0
g. Removing and reserving paragraph (g)(1)(ii);
0
h. Revising parameter ``FRs,p'' and ``N'' of Equation W-12A
in paragraph (g)(1)(iii);
0
i. Revising parameters ``FRi,p'' and ``N'' of Equation W-12B
in paragraph (g)(1)(iv);
0
j. Removing paragraph (g)(4);
0
k. Revising paragraph (h) introductory text;
0
l. Removing and reserving paragraph (h)(2);
0
m. Revising paragraph (i)(2) introductory text;
0
n. Revising parameters ``Ta'' and ``Pa'' of
Equation W-14A in paragraph (i)(2)(i);
0
o. Revising parameters ``Ta,p'', ``Pa,b,p'', and
``Pa,e,p'' of Equation W-14B in paragraph (i)(2)(i);
0
p. Adding paragraph (i)(2)(iv);
0
q. Revising paragraphs (j) and (k) introductory text,
0
r. Removing paragraph (k)(5);
0
s. Revising paragraphs (l) introductory text and (l)(3);
0
t. Removing paragraph (l)(6);
0
u. Revising paragraphs (m) introductory text and (m)(3);
0
v. Removing paragraph (m)(5);
0
w. Revising paragraphs (n), (o) introductory text, (o)(1)(i)
introductory text, (o)(1)(i)(A) through (C), (o)(2) introductory text,
(o)(2)(i) introductory text, and (o)(2)(ii);
0
x. Adding paragraph (o)(2)(iii);
0
y. Removing and reserving paragraph (o)(4)(ii)(D);
0
z. Revising paragraphs (o)(4)(ii)(E) and (o)(6)(i) introductory text;
0
aa. Revising parameter ``m'' of Equation W-21 in paragraph (o)(6)(i);
0
bb. Revising paragraph (o)(6)(ii) introductory text;
0
cc. Revising parameter ``m'' of Equation W-22 in paragraph (o)(6)(ii);
0
dd. Revising paragraph (o)(6)(iii) introductory text;
[[Page 50380]]
0
ee. Revising parameter ``m'' of Equation W-23 in paragraph (o)(6)(iii);
0
ff. Revising parameter ``Tg'' of Equation W-24B in paragraph
(o)(8);
0
gg. Revising paragraph (o)(10);
0
hh. Removing paragraph (o)(12);
0
ii. Revising paragraphs (p) introductory text, (p)(1)(i), (p)(2)
introductory text, (p)(2)(ii) introductory text, (p)(2)(ii)(C),
(p)(2)(iii)(A), and (p)(4)(ii)(C);
0
jj. Removing and reserving paragraph (p)(4)(ii)(D);
0
kk. Revising paragraphs (p)(4)(ii)(E), (p)(6)(ii) introductory text,
and (p)(6)(iii) introductory text,
0
ll. Revising parameter ``Tg'' of Equation W-29B in paragraph
(p)(8);
0
mm. Revising paragraph (p)(10);
0
nn. Removing paragraph (p)(12);
0
oo. Revising paragraphs (q) introductory text, (q)(1), (q)(2)
introductory text, (q)(2)(i), and (q)(2)(iii) through (xi);
0
pp. Adding paragraphs (q)(3) and (4);
0
qq. Revising paragraphs (r) and (s);
0
rr. In paragraph (t)(2), revising parameter ``Za'' of
Equation W-34, and removing the undesignated paragraph following the
parameters of Equation W-34;
0
ss. Revising paragraphs (u)(2)(ii), (y), and (z);
0
tt. Adding and reserving paragraphs (aa) through (cc); and
0
uu. Adding paragraphs (dd) and (ee).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 98.233 Calculating GHG emissions.
* * * * *
(a) Natural gas pneumatic device venting. For all natural gas
pneumatic devices at onshore petroleum and natural gas production
facilities, onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities, onshore natural gas processing facilities, onshore natural
gas transmission compression facilities, underground natural gas
storage facilities, and natural gas distribution facilities, use the
applicable provisions as specified in this paragraph (a) of this
section to calculate CH4 and CO2 emissions from
natural gas pneumatic device venting. If you have a flow meter on the
natural gas supply line dedicated to any one or combination of natural
gas pneumatic devices or natural gas driven pneumatic pumps vented
directly to the atmosphere for any portion of the year, you must use
the method specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section to calculate
CH4 and CO2 emissions from those devices. For
natural gas pneumatic devices vented directly to the atmosphere for
which the natural gas supply rate is not measured, use the applicable
methods specified in paragraphs (a)(2) through (6) of this section to
calculate CH4 and CO2 emissions. For natural gas
pneumatic devices that are routed to flares, combustion, or vapor
recovery systems, use the applicable provisions specified in paragraphs
(a)(7) of this section.
(1) Calculation Method 1. If you have or elect to install a flow
meter on the natural gas supply line dedicated to any one or
combination of natural gas pneumatic devices and natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps that are vented directly to the atmosphere, you must
use the applicable methods specified in paragraph (a)(1)(i) through
(iv) of this section to calculate CH4 and CO2
emissions from those devices.
(i) For volumetric flow monitors:
(A) Determine the cumulative annual volumetric flow, in standard
cubic feet, as measured by the flow monitor in the reporting year. If
all natural gas pneumatic devices supplied by the measured natural gas
supply line are routed to the atmosphere for only a portion of the year
and are routed to a flare, combustion, or vapor recovery system for the
remaining portion of the year, determine the cumulative annual
volumetric flow considering only those times when one or more of the
natural gas pneumatic devices were vented directly to the atmosphere.
If the flow meter was installed during the year, escalate the measured
volumetric flow by the ratio of the total hours for which natural gas
was supplied to the devices to the number of hours the natural gas
supplied to the devices was measured.
(B) Convert the natural gas volumetric flow from paragraph
(a)(1)(i)(A) of this section to CH4 and CO2
volumetric emissions following the provisions in paragraph (u) of this
section.
(C) Convert the CH4 and CO2 volumetric
emissions from paragraph (a)(1)(i)(B) of this section to CH4
and CO2 mass emissions using calculations in paragraph (v)
of this section.
(ii) For mass flow monitors:
(A) Determine the cumulative annual mass flow, in metric tons, as
measured by the flow monitor in the reporting year. If all natural gas
pneumatic devices supplied by the measured natural gas supply line are
vented directly to the atmosphere for only a portion of the year and
are routed to a flare, combustion, or vapor recovery system for the
remaining portion of the year, determine the cumulative annual mass
flow considering only those times when one or more of the natural gas
pneumatic devices were vented directly to the atmosphere. If the flow
meter was installed during the year, escalate the measured mass flow by
the ratio of the total hours for which natural gas was supplied to the
devices to the number of hours the natural gas supplied to the devices
was measured.
(B) Convert the cumulative mass flow from paragraph (a)(1)(ii)(A)
of this section to CH4 and CO2 mass emissions by
multiplying by the mass fraction of CH4 and CO2
in the supplied natural gas. You must follow the provisions in
paragraph (u) of this section for determining the mole fraction of
CH4 and CO2 and use molecular weights of 16 kg/
kg-mol and 44 kg/kg-mol for CH4 and CO2,
respectively. You may assume unspecified components have an average
molecular weight of 28 kg/kg-mol.
(iii) If the flow meter on the natural gas supply line serves both
natural gas pneumatic devices and natural gas driven pneumatic pumps,
disaggregate the total measured amount of natural gas to pneumatic
devices and natural gas driven pneumatic pumps based on engineering
calculations and best available data.
(iv) The flow meter must be operated and calibrated according to
the methods set forth in Sec. 98.234(b).
(2) Calculation Method 2. Except as provided in paragraphs (a)(1)
and (3) of this section, you must measure the volumetric flow rate of
each natural gas pneumatic device vent that vents directly to the
atmosphere at your facility as specified in paragraphs (a)(2)(i)
through (ix) of this section. You must exclude the counts of devices
measured according to paragraph (a)(1) of this section from the counts
of devices to be measured or for which emissions are calculated
according to the requirements in this paragraph (a)(2).
(i) For facilities in the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production and onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segments, you must measure all natural gas pneumatic devices
at your facility at least once every 5 years. If you elect to measure
your pneumatic devices over multiple years, you must measure
approximately the same number of devices each year. When you measure
the emissions from natural gas pneumatic devices at a well-pad or
gathering and boosting site, you must measure all natural gas pneumatic
devices that are vented directly to the atmosphere at the well-pad or
gathering and boosting site during the same calendar year.
(ii) For facilities in the onshore natural gas processing, onshore
natural gas transmission compression, underground natural gas storage,
or natural gas distribution industry
[[Page 50381]]
segments, you must either measure all natural gas pneumatic devices
vented directly to the atmosphere at your facility each year if your
facility has less than 26 pneumatic devices or over multiple years not
to exceed the number of years as specified in paragraphs (a)(2)(ii)(A)
through (D) of this section. If you elect to measure your pneumatic
devices over multiple years, you must measure approximately the same
number of devices each year.
(A) If your facility has at least 26 but not more than 50 natural
gas pneumatic devices vented directly to the atmosphere, the maximum
number of years to measure all devices at your facility is 2 years.
(B) If your facility has at least 51 but not more than 75 natural
gas pneumatic devices vented directly to the atmosphere, the maximum
number of years to measure all devices at your facility is 3 years.
(C) If your facility has at least 76 but not more than 100 natural
gas pneumatic devices vented directly to the atmosphere, the maximum
number of years to measure all devices at your facility is 4 years.
(D) If your facility has 101 or more natural gas pneumatic devices
vented directly to the atmosphere, the maximum number of years to
measure all devices at your facility is 5 years.
(iii) For all industry segments, determine the volumetric flow rate
of each natural gas pneumatic device vent (in standard cubic feet per
hour) using one of the methods specified in Sec. 98.234(b) through
(d), as appropriate, according to the requirements specified in
paragraphs (a)(2)(iii)(A) through (D) of this section.
(A) If you use a temporary meter, such as a vane anemometer,
according to the methods set forth in Sec. 98.234(b) or a high volume
sampler according to methods set forth Sec. 98.234(d), you must
measure the emissions from each device for a minimum of 15 minutes
while the device is in service (i.e., supplied with natural gas),
except for natural gas pneumatic isolation valve actuators. For natural
gas pneumatic isolation valve actuators, you must measure the emissions
from each device for a minimum of 5 minutes while the device is in
service (i.e., supplied with natural gas). If there is no measurable
flow from the natural gas pneumatic device after the minimum sampling
period, you can discontinue monitoring and follow the applicable
methods in paragraph (a)(2)(v) of this section.
(B) If you use calibrated bagging, follow the methods set forth in
Sec. 98.234(c) except you need only fill one bag to have a valid
measurement. You must collect sample for a minimum of 5 minutes for
natural gas pneumatic isolation valve actuators or 15 minutes for other
natural gas pneumatic devices. If no gas is collected in the calibrated
bag during the minimum sampling period, you can discontinue monitoring
and follow the applicable methods in paragraph (a)(2)(v) of this
section. If gas is collected in the bag during the minimum sampling
period, you must either continue sampling until you fill the calibrated
bag or you may elect to remeasure the vent according to paragraph
(a)(2)(iii)(A) of this section.
(C) You do not need to use the same measurement method for each
natural gas pneumatic device vent.
(D) If the measurement method selected measures the volumetric flow
rate in actual cubic feet, convert the measured flow to standard cubic
feet following the methods specified in paragraph (t)(1) of this
section.
(iv) For all industry segments, if there is measurable flow from
the device vent, calculate the volume of natural gas emitted from each
natural gas pneumatic device vent as the product of the natural gas
flow rate measured in paragraph (a)(2)(iii) of this section and the
number of hours the pneumatic device was in service (i.e., supplied
with natural gas) in the calendar year.
(v) For all industry segments, if there is no measurable flow from
the device vent, estimate the emissions from the device according to
the methods in paragraphs (a)(2)(v)(A) through (C) of this section, as
applicable.
(A) For continuous high bleed pneumatic devices:
(1) Confirm that the device is in-service. If not, remeasure the
device according to paragraph (a)(2)(iii) of this section at a time the
device is in-service.
(2) Confirm that the device is correctly characterized as a
continuous high bleed pneumatic device according to the provisions in
paragraph (a)(6) of this section. If the device type was
mischaracterized, recharacterize the device type and use the
appropriate methods in paragraphs (a)(2)(v)(B) or (C) of this section,
as applicable.
(3) Upon confirmation of the items in paragraphs (a)(2)(v)(A)(1)
and (2) of this section, remeasure the device vent using a different
measurement method or longer monitoring duration until the volumetric
venting rate can be accurately quantified.
(B) For continuous low bleed pneumatic devices:
(1) Confirm that the device is in-service. If not, remeasure the
device according to paragraph (a)(2)(iii) of this section at a time the
device is in-service.
(2) Determine natural gas bleed rate (in standard cubic feet per
hour) at the supply pressure used for the pneumatic device based on the
manufacturer's steady state natural gas bleed rate reported for the
device. If the steady state bleed rate is reported in terms of air
consumption, multiply the air consumption rate by 1.29 to calculate the
steady state natural gas bleed rate. If a steady state bleed rate is
not reported, you need to reassess whether the device is correctly
characterized as a continuous low bleed pneumatic device according to
the provisions in paragraph (a)(6) of this section.
(3) Calculate the volume of natural gas emitted from the natural
gas pneumatic device vent as the product of the natural gas steady
state bleed rate determined in paragraph (a)(2)(v)(B)(2) of this
section and number of hours the pneumatic device was in service (i.e.,
supplied with natural gas) in the calendar year.
(C) For intermittent bleed pneumatic devices:
(1) Confirm that the device is in-service. If not, remeasure the
device according to paragraph (a)(2)(iii) of this section at a time the
device is in-service and calculate natural gas emissions according to
paragraph (a)(2)(iv) of this section. For devices confirmed to be in-
service during the measurement period, calculate natural gas emissions
according to paragraph (a)(2)(v)(C)(2) through (5) of this section.
(2) Calculate the volume of the controller, tubing and actuator (in
actual cubic feet) based on the device and tubing size.
(3) Sum the volumes in paragraph (a)(2)(v)(C)(2) of this section
and convert the volume to standard cubic feet following the methods
specified in paragraph (t)(1) of this section based on the natural gas
supply pressure.
(4) Estimate the number of actuations during the year based on
company records, if available, or best engineering estimates. For
isolation valve actuators, you may multiply the number of valve
closures during the year by 2 (one actuation to close the valve; one
actuation to open the valve).
(5) Calculate the volume of natural gas emitted from the natural
gas pneumatic device vent as the product of the per actuation volume in
standard cubic feet determined in paragraph (a)(2)(v)(C)(3) of this
section, the number of actuations during the year as determined in
paragraph (a)(2)(v)(C)(4) of this section, and the relay correction
factor. Use 1 for the relay correction factor if there is no relay; use
3 for the relay correction factor if there is a relay.
(6) Calculate the hourly average volume of natural gas emitted from
the
[[Page 50382]]
natural gas pneumatic device vent by dividing the volume of natural gas
emitted as determined in paragraph (a)(2)(v)(C)(5) of this section by
the number of hours the pneumatic device was in service (i.e., supplied
with natural gas) in the calendar year.
(vi) For each pneumatic device, convert the volumetric emissions of
natural gas at standard conditions determined in paragraph (a)(2)(iv)
or (v) of this section, as applicable, to CO2 and
CH4 volumetric emissions at standard conditions using the
methods specified in paragraph (u) of this section.
(vii) For each pneumatic device, convert the GHG volumetric
emissions at standard conditions determined in paragraph (a)(2)(vi) of
this section to GHG mass emissions using the methods specified in
paragraph (v) of this section.
(viii) Sum the CO2 and CH4 mass emissions
determined in paragraph (a)(2)(vii) of this section separately for each
type of natural gas pneumatic device (continuous high bleed, continuous
low bleed, and intermittent bleed).
(ix) If you chose to conduct natural gas pneumatic device
measurements over multiple years, ``n,'' according to paragraph
(a)(2)(i) or (ii) of this section, then you must calculate the
emissions from all pneumatic devices at your facility as specified in
paragraph (a)(2)(ix)(A) through (D) of this section.
(A) Use the emissions calculated in (a)(2)(viii) of this section
for the devices measured during the reporting year.
(B) Calculate the whole gas emission factor for each type of
pneumatic device at the facility using Equation W-1A and all available
data from the current year and the previous years in your monitoring
cycle (n-1 years) for which natural gas pneumatic device vent
measurements were made according to Calculation Method 2 in paragraph
(a)(2) of this section (e.g., if your monitoring cycle is 3 years, then
use measured data from the current year and the two previous years).
This emission factor must be updated annually.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.000
Where:
EFt = Whole gas population emission factor for natural
gas pneumatic device vents of type ``t'' (continuous high bleed,
continuous low bleed, intermittent bleed), in standard cubic feet
per hour per device.
MTs,t,y = Volumetric whole gas emissions rate measurement
at standard (``s'') conditions from component type ``t'' during year
``y'' in standard cubic feet per hour, as calculated in paragraph
(a)(2)(iii) [if there was measurable flow from the device vent],
(a)(2)(v)(B)(2), or (a)(2)(v)(C)(6) of this section, as applicable.
Countt,y = Count of natural gas pneumatic device vents of
type ``t'' measured according to Calculation Method 2 in year ``y.''
n = Number of years of data to include in the emission factor
calculation according to the number of years used to monitor all
natural gas pneumatic device vents at the facility.
(C) Calculate CH4 and CO2 volumetric
emissions from continuous high bleed, continuous low bleed, and
intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic devices that were not measured
during the reporting year using Equation W-1B of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.001
Where:
Es,i = Annual total volumetric GHG emissions at standard
conditions in standard cubic feet per year from natural gas
pneumatic device vents, of types ``t'' (continuous high bleed,
continuous low bleed, intermittent bleed), for GHGi.
Countt = Total number of natural gas pneumatic devices of
type ``t'' (continuous high bleed, continuous low bleed,
intermittent bleed) as determined in paragraphs (a)(4) through (6)
of this section that vent directly to the atmosphere and that were
not directly measured according to the requirements in paragraph
(a)(1) or (a)(2)(iii) of this section.
EFt = Population emission factors for natural gas
pneumatic device vents (in standard cubic feet per hour per device)
of each type ``t'' (continuous high bleed, continuous low bleed,
intermittent bleed) as calculated using Equation W-1A of this
section.
GHGi = For onshore petroleum and natural gas production
facilities, onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities, onshore natural gas processing, onshore natural gas
transmission compression facilities, underground natural gas storage
facilities, and natural gas distribution facilities, concentration
of GHGi, CH4 or CO2, in produced
natural gas or processed natural gas for each facility as specified
in paragraph (u)(2) of this section.
Tt = Average estimated number of hours in the operating
year the devices, of each type ``t'', were in service (i.e.,
supplied with natural gas) using engineering estimates based on best
available data. Default is 8,760 hours.
(D) Convert the volumetric emissions calculated using Equation W-1B
to CH4 and CO2 mass emissions using the methods
specified in paragraph (v) of this section.
(E) Sum the CH4 and CO2 mass emissions
calculated in paragraphs (a)(2)(ix)(A) and (D) of this section
separately for each type of pneumatic device (continuous high bleed,
continuous low bleed, intermittent bleed) to calculate the total
CH4 and CO2 mass emissions by device type for
Calculation Method 2.
(3) Calculation Method 3. As an alternative to Calculation Method
2, you may elect to use the applicable methods specified in paragraphs
(a)(3)(i) through (v) of this section, as applicable, to calculate
CH4 and CO2 emissions from your natural gas
pneumatic devices that are vented directly to the atmosphere at your
facility except those that are measured according to paragraph (a)(1)
of this section. You must exclude the counts of devices measured
according to paragraph (a)(1) of this section from the counts of
devices to be monitored or for which emissions are calculated according
to the requirements in this paragraph (a)(3).
(i) For continuous high bleed and continuous low bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices vented directly to the atmosphere, you must calculate
CH4 and CO2 volumetric emissions using either the
methods in paragraph (a)(3)(i)(A) or (B) of this section.
[[Page 50383]]
(A) Measure all continuous high bleed and continuous low bleed
pneumatic devices at your well-pad, gathering and boosting site, or
facility, as applicable, according to the provisions in paragraphs
(a)(2) of this section.
(B) Use Equation W-1B, except use the appropriate default whole gas
population emission factors for natural gas pneumatic device vents (in
standard cubic feet per hour per device) of each type ``t'' (continuous
high bleed and continuous low bleed) as listed in table W-1 to this
subpart.
(ii) For intermittent bleed pneumatic devices, you must monitor
each intermittent bleed pneumatic device at your facility using the
methods specified in paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(A) of this section at the
frequency specified in paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(B) or (C) of this section,
as applicable.
(A) You must use one of the monitoring methods specified in Sec.
98.234(a)(1) through (3) except that the monitoring dwell time for each
device vent must be at least 2 minutes or until a malfunction is
identified, whichever is shorter. A device is considered malfunctioning
if any leak is observed when the device is not actuating or if a leak
is observed for more than 5 seconds during a device actuation. If you
cannot tell when a device is actuating, any observed leak from the
device indicates a malfunctioning device.
(B) For facilities in the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production and onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segments, you must monitor all natural gas intermittent bleed
pneumatic devices at your facility at least once every 5 years. If you
elect to monitor your pneumatic devices over multiple years, you must
monitor approximately the same number of devices each year. When you
monitor the emissions from natural gas pneumatic devices at a well-pad
or gathering and boosting site, you must monitor all natural gas
intermittent bleed pneumatic devices that are vented directly to the
atmosphere at the well-pad or gathering and boosting site during the
same calendar year.
(C) For facilities in the onshore natural gas processing, onshore
natural gas transmission compression, underground natural gas storage,
or natural gas distribution industry segments you must either monitor
all natural gas intermittent bleed pneumatic devices vented directly to
the atmosphere at your facility each year if your facility has less
than 101 intermittent bleed pneumatic devices or over multiple years
not to exceed the number of years as specified in paragraphs
(a)(3)(ii)(C)(1) through (4) of this section. If you elect to monitor
your intermittent bleed pneumatic devices over multiple years, you must
monitor approximately the same number of devices each year.
(1) If your facility has at least 101 but not more than 200 natural
gas intermittent bleed pneumatic devices vented directly to the
atmosphere, the maximum number of years to monitor all devices at your
facility is 2 years.
(2) If your facility has at least 201 but not more than 300 natural
gas intermittent bleed pneumatic devices vented directly to the
atmosphere, the maximum number of years to monitor all devices at your
facility is 3 years.
(3) If your facility has at least 301 but not more than 400 natural
gas intermittent bleed pneumatic devices vented directly to the
atmosphere, the maximum number of years to monitor all devices at your
facility is 4 years.
(4) If your facility has 401 or more natural gas intermittent bleed
pneumatic devices vented directly to the atmosphere, the maximum number
of years to monitor all devices at your facility is 5 years.
(iii) For intermittent bleed pneumatic devices that are monitored
according to paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(A) of this section during the
reporting year, you must calculate CH4 and CO2
volumetric emissions from intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic
devices vented directly to the atmosphere using Equation W-1C of this
section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.002
Where:
Ei = Annual total volumetric emissions of GHGi
from intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic devices in standard
cubic feet.
GHGi = Concentration of GHGi, CH4, or
CO2, in natural gas supplied to the intermittent bleed
natural gas pneumatic device as defined in paragraph (u)(2) of this
section.
x = Total number of intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic devices
detected as malfunctioning in any pneumatic device monitoring survey
during the year. A component found as malfunctioning in two or more
surveys during the year is counted as one malfunctioning component.
16.1 = Whole gas emission factor for malfunctioning intermittent
bleed natural gas pneumatic devices, in standard cubic feet per hour
per device.
Tmal,z = The total time the surveyed pneumatic device
``z'' was in service (i.e., supplied with natural gas) and assumed
to be malfunctioning, in hours. If one pneumatic device monitoring
survey is conducted in the calendar year, assume the device found
malfunctioning was malfunctioning for the entire calendar year. If
multiple pneumatic device monitoring surveys are conducted in the
calendar year, assume a device found malfunctioning in the first
survey was malfunctioning since the beginning of the year until the
date of the survey; assume a device found malfunctioning in the last
survey of the year was malfunctioning from the preceding survey
through the end of the year; assume a device found malfunctioning in
a survey between the first and last surveys of the year was
malfunctioning since the preceding survey until the date of the
survey; and sum times for all malfunctioning periods.
Tt,z = The total time the surveyed natural gas pneumatic
device ``z'' was in service (i.e., supplied with natural gas) during
the year. Default is 8,760 hours for non-leap years and 8,784 hours
for leap years.
2.82 = Whole gas emission factor for properly operating intermittent
bleed natural gas pneumatic devices, in standard cubic feet per hour
per device.
Count = Total number of intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic
devices that were never observed to be malfunctioning during any
monitoring survey during the year.
Tavg = The average time the intermittent bleed natural
gas pneumatic devices that were never observed to be malfunctioning
during any monitoring survey were in service (i.e., supplied with
natural gas) using engineering estimates based on best available
data. Default is 8,760 hours for non-leap years and 8,784 hours for
leap years.
(A) You must conduct at least one complete pneumatic device
monitoring survey in a calendar year. If you conduct multiple complete
pneumatic device monitoring surveys in a calendar year, you must use
the results from each complete pneumatic device monitoring survey when
calculating emissions using Equation W-1C.
(B) For the purposes of paragraph (a)(3)(iii)(A) of this section, a
complete monitoring survey is a survey of all
[[Page 50384]]
intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic devices vented directly to the
atmosphere at a well-pad for onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facilities, all intermittent bleed pneumatic devices vented
directly to the atmosphere at a gathering and boosting site for onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting facilities, or all
intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic devices vented directly to the
atmosphere at a facility required to be monitored during a given year
for other applicable industry segments.
(iv) For intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic devices that are
not monitored according to paragraph (a)(3)(ii)(A) of this section
during the reporting you, you must calculate CH4 and
CO2 volumetric emissions from intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices vented directly to the atmosphere as specified in
paragraphs (a)(3)(iv)(A) through (D) of this section.
(A) Count the number of unique intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices vented directly to the atmosphere that were monitored
during the reporting year. If you conducted multiple monitoring
surveys, count each device only once; do not count the same device
twice if it was monitored two times during the reporting year.
(B) Count the number of unique intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices vented directly to the atmosphere that were monitored
during the reporting year that were identified as malfunctioning during
the reporting year. If you conducted multiple monitoring surveys, count
each device only once; do not count the same device twice if it was
monitored and identified as malfunctioning two separate times during
the reporting. If a device was malfunctioning during one monitoring
survey and not during a second, count that device as a device that was
identified as malfunctioning during the reporting year.
(C) Determine the number of intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices vented directly to the atmosphere at your facility
that were not monitored during the reporting year as the difference
between the total count of devices at your facility as determined
according to paragraphs (a)(4) through (6) of this section and the
count of unique devices monitored during the reporting year as
determined in paragraph (a)(3)(vi)(A) of this section.
(D) Calculate CH4 and CO2 volumetric
emissions from intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic devices vented
directly to the atmosphere that were not monitored during the reporting
year using Equation W-1D of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.003
Where:
Ei = Annual total volumetric emissions of GHGi
from intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic devices in standard
cubic feet.
GHGi = Concentration of GHGi, CH4 or CO2, in
natural gas supplied to the intermittent bleed device as defined in
paragraph (u)(2) of this section.
Tavg = The average time the intermittent bleed natural
gas pneumatic devices that were not surveyed during the year were in
service (i.e., supplied with natural gas) using engineering
estimates based on best available data. Default is 8,760 hours.
CountC = Total number of intermittent bleed pneumatic
devices that were not surveyed during the year as determined
according to paragraph (a)(3)(iv)(C) of this section.
16.1 = Whole gas emission factor for malfunctioning intermittent
bleed natural gas pneumatic devices, in standard cubic feet per hour
per device.
CountB = Total number of unique intermittent bleed
natural gas pneumatic devices vented directly to the atmosphere that
were monitored during the reporting year that were identified as
malfunctioning during the reporting year as determined according to
paragraph (a)(3)(iv)(B) of this section.
CountA = Total number the number of unique intermittent
bleed natural gas pneumatic devices vented directly to the
atmosphere that were monitored during the reporting year as
determined according to paragraph (a)(3)(iv)(A) of this section.
2.82 = Whole gas emission factor for properly operating intermittent
bleed natural gas pneumatic devices, in standard cubic feet per hour
per device.
(v) You must convert the CH4 and CO2
volumetric emissions as determined according to paragraphs (a)(3)(i),
(iii) and (iv) of this section and calculate both CO2 and
CH4 mass emissions using calculations in paragraph (v) of
this section for each type of natural gas pneumatic device (continuous
high bleed, continuous low bleed, and intermittent bleed).
(4) Counts of natural gas pneumatic devices. For all industry
segments, determine ``Countt'' for Equation W-1A, W-1B, or W-1C of this
subpart for each type of natural gas pneumatic device (continuous high
bleed, continuous low bleed, and intermittent bleed) by counting the
total number of devices at the facility, the number of devices that are
vented directly to the atmosphere and the number of those devices that
were measured or monitored during the reporting year, as applicable,
except as specified in paragraph (a)(5) of this section.
(5) Counts of onshore petroleum and natural gas production industry
segment or the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
natural gas pneumatic devices. For facilities in the onshore petroleum
and natural gas production industry segment or the onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting industry segment, you have the
option in the first two consecutive calendar years to determine the
total number of natural gas pneumatic devices at the facility and the
number of devices that are vented directly to the atmosphere for each
type of natural gas pneumatic device (continuous high bleed, continuous
low bleed, and intermittent bleed), as applicable, using engineering
estimates based on best available data. Counts of natural gas pneumatic
devices measured or monitored during the reporting year must be made
based on actual counts.
(6) Type of natural gas pneumatic devices. For all industry
segments, determine the type of natural gas pneumatic device using
engineering estimates based on best available information.
(7) Routing to flares, combustion, or vapor recovery systems.
Calculate emissions from natural gas pneumatic devices routed to
flares, combustion, or vapor recovery systems as specified in paragraph
(a)(7)(i) or (ii) of this section, as applicable. If a device was
vented directly to the atmosphere for part of the year and routed to a
flare, combustion unit, or vapor recovery system during another part of
the year, then calculate emissions from the time the device vents
directly to the atmosphere as specified in paragraph (a)(1), (2) or (3)
of this section, as applicable, and calculate emissions from the time
the device was routed to a flare or combustion as specified in
paragraph (a)(7)(i) or (ii) of this section, as applicable. During
periods when natural
[[Page 50385]]
gas pneumatic device emissions are collected in a vapor recovery system
that is not routed to combustion, paragraphs (a)(1) through (3) and
(a)(7)(i) and (ii) of this section do not apply and no emissions
calculations are required.
(i) If any natural gas pneumatic devices were routed to a flare,
you must calculate CH4, CO2, and N2O
emissions for the flare stack as specified in paragraph (n) of this
section and report emissions from the flare as specified in Sec.
98.236(n).
(ii) If emissions from any natural gas pneumatic devices were
routed to combustion units, you must calculate and report emissions as
specified in subpart C of this part or calculate emissions as specified
in paragraph (z) of this section and report emissions from the
combustion equipment as specified in Sec. 98.236(z), as applicable.
* * * * *
(c) Natural gas driven pneumatic pump venting. Calculate emissions
from natural gas driven pneumatic pumps venting directly to the
atmosphere as specified in paragraph (c)(1), (2), or (3) of this
section, as applicable. If you have a flow meter on the natural gas
supply line that is dedicated to any one or more natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps, each of which only vents directly to the atmosphere,
you must use Calculation Method 1 as specified in paragraph (c)(1) of
this section to calculate vented CH4 and CO2
emissions from those pumps. Use Calculation Method 1 for any portion of
a year when all of the pumps on the measured natural gas supply line
were vented directly to atmosphere. For natural gas driven pneumatic
pumps vented directly to the atmosphere for which the natural gas
supply rate is not measured, use either the method specified in
paragraph (c)(2) or (3) of this section to calculate vented
CH4 and CO2 emissions for all of the natural gas
driven pneumatic pumps at your facility that are not subject to
Calculation Method 1; you may not use Calculation Method 2 for some
vented natural gas driven pneumatic pumps and Calculation Method 3 for
other natural gas driven pneumatic pumps. Similarly, if a flow meter is
on a natural gas supply line that supplies some pumps that vent
directly to the atmosphere and others that route emissions to flares,
combustion, or vapor recovery systems, then use either the method
specified in paragraph (c)(2) or (3) of this section to calculate
vented CH4 and CO2 emissions because Calculation
Method 1 may not be used for this natural gas supply line. Calculate
emissions from natural gas driven pneumatic pumps routed to flares or
combustion as specified in paragraph (c)(4) of this section. If a pump
vents directly to the atmosphere for part of the year and to a flare or
combustion unit for another part of the year, then calculate vented
emissions for the portion of the year when venting occurs using the
applicable method in paragraph (c)(1), (2), or (3) of this section for
the period when venting occurs, and calculate emissions for the portion
of the year when the emissions are routed to a flare or combustion unit
using the method in paragraph (c)(4) of this section. No emissions
calculation is required during periods when emissions from a pump are
routed to a vapor recovery system without subsequently being routed to
combustion. All references to natural gas driven pneumatic pumps for
Calculation Method 1 in this paragraph (c) also apply to combinations
of pneumatic devices and natural gas driven pneumatic pumps that are
served by a common natural gas supply line; when the supply line serves
both pneumatic devices and natural gas driven pneumatic pumps,
disaggregate the total measured amount of natural gas to pneumatic
devices and natural gas driven pneumatic pumps based on engineering
calculations and best available data. You do not have to calculate
emissions from natural gas driven pneumatic pumps covered in paragraph
(e) of this section under this paragraph (c).
(1) Calculation Method 1. If you have or elect to install a flow
meter on a supply line to natural gas driven pneumatic pumps, then for
the period of the year when the natural gas supply line is dedicated to
any one or more natural gas driven pneumatic pumps, and the pumps are
vented directly to the atmosphere, you must use the applicable methods
specified in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) or (ii) of this section to calculate
vented CH4 and CO2 emissions from those pumps.
(i) For volumetric flow monitors:
(A) Determine the cumulative annual volumetric flow, in standard
cubic feet, as measured by the flow monitor in the reporting year. If
the flow meter was installed during the year, calculate the total
annual volume of natural gas used in the pumps that are connected to
the measured supply line by escalating the measured volumetric flow by
the ratio of the total hours for which natural gas was supplied to the
pumps to the number of hours the natural gas supplied to the pumps was
measured as specified in Equation W-2A of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.004
Where:
Es = Annual natural gas emissions for pumps connected to
natural gas supply line that had a natural gas flow meter installed
during the year, in standard cubic feet.
Es,M = Measured volume of natural gas in the supply line,
from the time that the natural gas flow meter began measuring to the
end of the year, in standard cubic feet.
T = Total hours during the year in which at least one of the pumps
connected to the supply line was operating, hr/yr.
TM = Total hours during the year when the natural gas
supply flow meter was measuring flow.
(B) Convert the natural gas volumetric flow from paragraph
(c)(1)(i)(A) of this section to CH4 and CO2
volumetric emissions following the provisions in paragraph (u) of this
section.
(C) Convert the CH4 and CO2 volumetric
emissions from paragraph (c)(1)(i)(B) of this section to CH4
and CO2 mass emissions using calculations in paragraph (v)
of this section.
(ii) For mass flow monitors:
(A) Determine the cumulative annual mass flow, in metric tons, as
measured by the flow monitor in the reporting year. If the flow meter
was installed during the year, calculate the total annual mass of
natural gas used in the pumps that are connected to the measured supply
line by escalating the measured mass flow by the ratio of the total
hours for which natural gas was supplied to the pumps to the number of
hours the natural gas supplied to the pumps was measured as specified
in Equation W-2A of paragraph (c)(1)(i)(A) of this section, except that
Es and Es,M are in metric tons per year instead
of standard cubic feet per year.
(B) Convert the cumulative mass flow from paragraph (c)(1)(ii)(A)
of this section to CH4 and CO2 mass emissions
[[Page 50386]]
by multiplying by the mass fraction of CH4 and
CO2 in the supplied natural gas. You must follow the
provisions in paragraph (u) of this section for determining the mole
fraction of CH4 and CO2 and use molecular weights
of 16 kg/kg-mol and 44 kg/kg-mol for CH4 and CO2,
respectively. You may assume unspecified components have an average
molecular weight of 28 kg/kg-mol.
(2) Calculation Method 2. Except as provided in paragraph (c)(1) of
this section, you may elect to measure the volumetric flow rate of each
natural gas driven pneumatic pump at your facility that vents directly
to the atmosphere as specified in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (vii) of
this section. You must exclude the counts of pumps measured according
to paragraph (c)(1) of this section from the counts of pumps to be
measured and for which emissions are calculated according to the
requirements in this paragraph (c)(2).
(i) Measure all natural gas driven pneumatic pumps at your facility
at least once every 5 years. If you elect to measure your pneumatic
pumps over multiple years, you must measure approximately the same
number of pumps each year. When you measure the emissions from natural
gas driven pneumatic pumps at a well-pad or gathering and boosting
site, you must measure all pneumatic pumps that are vented directly to
the atmosphere at the well-pad or gathering and boosting site during
the same calendar year.
(ii) Determine the volumetric flow rate of each natural gas driven
pneumatic pump (in standard cubic feet per hour) using one of the
methods specified in Sec. 98.234(b) through (d), as appropriate,
according to the requirements specified in paragraphs (c)(2)(ii)(A)
through (D) of this section.
(A) If you use a temporary meter, such as a vane anemometer,
according to the methods set forth in Sec. 98.234(b) or a high volume
sampler according to methods set forth Sec. 98.234(d), you must
measure the emissions from each pump for a minimum of 5 minutes, during
a period when the pump is continuously pumping liquid.
(B) If you use calibrated bagging, follow the methods set forth in
Sec. 98.234(c), except under Sec. 98.234(c)(2), only one bag must be
filled to have a valid measurement. You must collect sample for a
minimum of 5 minutes, or until the bag is full, whichever is shorter,
during a period when the pump is continuously pumping liquid. If the
bag is not full after 5 minutes, you must either continue sampling
until you fill the calibrated bag or you may elect to remeasure the
vent according to paragraph (c)(2)(ii)(A) of this section.
(C) You do not need to use the same measurement method for each
natural gas driven pneumatic pump vent.
(D) If the measurement method selected measures the volumetric flow
rate in actual cubic feet, convert the measured flow to standard cubic
feet following the methods specified in paragraph (t)(1) of this
section. Convert the measured flow during the test period to standard
cubic feet per hour, as appropriate.
(iii) Calculate the volume of natural gas emitted from each natural
gas driven pneumatic pump vent as the product of the natural gas
emissions flow rate measured in paragraph (c)(2)(ii) of this section
and the number of hours that liquid was pumped by the pneumatic pump in
the calendar year.
(iv) For each pneumatic pump, convert the volumetric emissions of
natural gas at standard conditions determined in paragraph (c)(2)(iii)
of this section to CO2 and CH4 volumetric
emissions at standard conditions using the methods specified in
paragraph (u) of this section.
(v) For each pneumatic pump, convert the GHG volumetric emissions
at standard conditions determined in paragraph (c)(2)(iv) of this
section to GHG mass emissions using the methods specified in paragraph
(v) of this section.
(vi) Sum the CO2 and CH4 mass emissions
determined in paragraph (c)(2)(v) of this section.
(vii) If you chose to conduct natural gas pneumatic pump
measurements over multiple years, ``n,'' according to paragraph
(c)(2)(i) of this section, then you must calculate the emissions from
all pneumatic pumps at your facility as specified in paragraph
(c)(2)(vii)(A) through (D) of this section.
(A) Use the emissions calculated in paragraph (c)(2)(vi) of this
section for the pumps measured during the reporting year.
(B) Calculate the whole gas emission factor for pneumatic pumps at
the facility using Equation W-2B of this section and all available data
from the current year and the previous years in your monitoring cycle
(n-1 years) for which natural gas pneumatic pump vent measurements were
made according to Calculation Method 2 in paragraph (c)(2) of this
section (e.g., if your monitoring cycle is 3 years, then use measured
data from the current year and the two previous years). This emission
factor must be updated annually.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.005
Where:
EFs = Whole gas population emission factor for natural
gas pneumatic pump vents, in standard cubic feet per hour per pump.
MTs,y = Volumetric whole gas emissions rate measurement
at standard (``s'') conditions during year ``y'' in standard cubic
feet per hour, as calculated in paragraph (c)(2)(iii) of this
section.
County = Count of natural gas driven pneumatic pump vents measured
according to Calculation Method 2 in year ``y.''
n = Number of years of data to include in the emission factor
calculation according to the number of years used to monitor all
natural gas pneumatic pump vents at the facility.
(C) Calculate CH4 and CO2 volumetric
emissions from natural gas driven pneumatic pumps that were not
measured during the reporting year using Equation W-2C of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.006
Where:
Es,i = Annual total volumetric GHG emissions at standard
conditions in standard cubic feet per year from natural gas driven
pneumatic pump vents, for GHGi.
Count = Total number of natural gas driven pneumatic pumps that
vented directly to the atmosphere and that were not directly
measured according to the requirements in paragraphs (c)(1) or
(c)(2)(ii) of this section.
[[Page 50387]]
EFs = Population emission factors for natural gas driven
pneumatic pumps (in standard cubic feet per hour per pump) as
calculated using Equation W-2B of this section.
GHGi = Concentration of GHGi, CH4 or
CO2, in produced natural gas as defined in paragraph
(u)(2)(i) of this section.
T = Average estimated number of hours in the operating year the
pumps that vented directly to the atmosphere were pumping liquid
using engineering estimates based on best available data. Default is
8,760 hours for pumps that only vented directly to the atmosphere.
(D) Calculate both CH4 and CO2 mass emissions
from volumetric emissions calculated using Equation W-2C of this
section using calculations in paragraph (v) of this section.
(E) Sum the CH4 and CO2 mass emissions
calculated in paragraphs (c)(2)(vii)(A) and (D) of this section to
calculate the total CH4 and CO2 mass emissions
for Calculation Method 2.
(3) Calculation Method 3. If you elect not to measure emissions as
specified in Calculation Method 2, then you must use the applicable
method specified in paragraphs (c)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section to
calculate CH4 and CO2 emissions from all natural
gas driven pneumatic pumps that are vented directly to the atmosphere
at your facility and that are not measured according to paragraph
(c)(1) of this section. You must exclude the counts of devices measured
according to paragraph (c)(1) of this section from the counts of pumps
for which emissions are calculated according to the requirements in
this paragraph (c)(3).
(i) Calculate CH4 and CO2 volumetric
emissions from natural gas driven pneumatic pumps using Equation W-2C
of this section, except use the appropriate default whole gas
population emission factor for natural gas pneumatic pump vents (in
standard cubic feet per hour per device) as provided in table W-1 to
this subpart.
(ii) Convert the CH4 and CO2 volumetric
emissions determined according to paragraph (c)(3)(i) of this section
to CO2 and CH4 mass emissions using calculations
in paragraph (v) of this section.
(4) Routing to flares, combustion, or vapor recovery systems.
Calculate emissions from natural gas driven pneumatic pumps for periods
when they are routed to flares or combustion as specified in paragraph
(c)(4)(i) or (ii) of this section, as applicable. If a pump was vented
directly to the atmosphere for part of the year and routed to a flare
or combustion during another part of the year, then calculate emissions
from the time the pump vents directly to the atmosphere as specified in
paragraphs (c)(2) or (3) of this section and calculate emissions from
the time the pump was routed to a flare or combustion as specified in
paragraphs (c)(4)(i) and (ii) of this section, as applicable. For
emissions that are collected in a vapor recovery system that is never
routed to combustion during the reporting year, paragraphs (c)(2) and
(3) and paragraphs (c)(4)(i) and (ii) of this section do not apply and
no emissions calculations are required.
(i) If any natural gas driven pneumatic pumps were routed to a
flare, you must calculate CH4, CO2, and
N2O emissions for the flare stack as specified in paragraph
(n) of this section and report emissions from the flare as specified in
Sec. 98.236(n).
(ii) If emissions from any natural gas driven pneumatic pumps were
routed to combustion, you must calculate emissions for the combustion
equipment as specified in paragraph (z) of this section and report
emissions from the combustion equipment as specified in Sec.
98.236(z).
(d) Acid gas removal unit (AGR) vents and Nitrogen removal unit
(NRU) vents. For AGR vents (including processes such as amine,
membrane, molecular sieve or other absorbents and adsorbents),
calculate emissions for CH4 and CO2 vented
directly to the atmosphere or emitted through a sulfur recovery plant,
using any of the calculation methods described in paragraphs (d)(1)
through (4) of this section, and also comply with paragraphs (d)(5)
through (11) of this section, as applicable. For NRU vents, calculate
emissions for CH4 vented directly to the atmosphere using
any of the calculation methods described in paragraphs (d)(1) through
(4) of this section, and also comply with paragraphs (d)(5) through
(11) of this section, as applicable. If any AGR vents or NRU vents are
routed to a flare, you must calculate CH4, CO2,
and N2O emissions for the flare stack as specified in
paragraph (n) of this section and report emissions from the flare as
specified in Sec. 98.236(n). If any AGR vents or NRU vents are routed
through an engine (e.g., permeate from a membrane or de-adsorbed gas
from a pressure swing adsorber used as fuel supplement) (i.e., routed
to combustion, you must calculate CH4, CO2, and
N2O emissions as specified in subpart C of this part or as
specified in paragraph (z) of this section, as applicable.
(1) Calculation Method 1. If you operate and maintain a continuous
emissions monitoring system (CEMS) that has both a CO2
concentration monitor and volumetric flow rate monitor, you must
calculate CO2 emissions under this subpart by following the
Tier 4 Calculation Method and all associated calculation, quality
assurance, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements for Tier 4 in
subpart C of this part (General Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources).
Alternatively, you may follow the manufacturer's instructions or
industry standard practice. If a CO2 concentration monitor
and volumetric flow rate monitor are not available, you may elect to
install a CO2 concentration monitor and a volumetric flow
rate monitor that comply with all of the requirements specified for the
Tier 4 Calculation Method in subpart C of this part (General Stationary
Fuel Combustion Sources).
(2) Calculation Method 2. For CO2 emissions, if a CEMS
is not available but a vent meter is installed, use the CO2
composition and annual volume of vent gas to calculate emissions using
Equation W-3 of this section. For CH4 emissions, if a vent
meter is installed, including the volumetric flow rate monitor on a
CEMS for CO2, use the CH4 composition and annual
volume of vent gas to calculate emissions using Equation W-3 of this
section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.007
Where:
Ea,i = Annual total volumetric GHGi (either
CO2 or CH4) emissions at actual conditions, in
cubic feet per year.
Va = Total annual volume of vent gas flowing out of the
AGR or NRU in cubic feet per year at actual conditions as determined
by flow meter using methods set forth in Sec. 98.234(b).
Alternatively, you may follow the manufacturer's instructions or
industry standard practice for calibration of the vent meter.
Voli = Annual average volumetric fraction of GHGi (either
CO2 or CH4) content in vent gas flowing out of
the AGR or NRU as determined in paragraph (d)(7) of this section.
(3) Calculation Method 3. If a CEMS for CO2 or a vent
meter is not installed, you may use the inlet and/or outlet gas
[[Page 50388]]
flow rate of the AGR or NRU to calculate emissions for CH4
and CO2 using Equations W-4A, W-4B, or W-4C of this section.
If inlet gas flow rate and CH4 and CO2 content of
the vent gas are known, use Equation W-4A. If outlet gas flow rate and
CH4 and CO2 content of the vent gas are known,
use Equation W-4B. If inlet gas flow rate and outlet gas flow rate are
known, use Equation W-4C.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.010
Where:
Ea,i = Annual total volumetric GHGi (either
CH4 or CO2) emissions at actual conditions, in
cubic feet per year.
Vin = Total annual volume of natural gas flow into the
AGR or NRU in cubic feet per year at actual conditions as determined
using methods specified in paragraph (d)(5) of this section.
Vout = Total annual volume of natural gas flow out of the
AGR or NRU in cubic feet per year at actual conditions as determined
using methods specified in paragraph (d)(5) of this section.
VolI,i = Annual average volumetric fraction of GHGi
(either CH4 or CO2) content in natural gas
flowing into the AGR or NRU as determined in paragraph (d)(7) of
this section.
VolO,i = Annual average volumetric fraction of GHGi
(either CH4 or CO2) content in natural gas
flowing out of the AGR or NRU as determined in paragraph (d)(8) of
this section.
VolEM,i = Annual average volumetric fraction of GHGi
(either CH4 or CO2) content in the vent gas
flowing out of the AGR or NRU as determined in paragraph (d)(6) of
this section.
(4) Calculation Method 4. If CEMS for CO2 or a vent
meter is not installed, you may calculate CH4 and
CO2 emissions from an AGR or NRU using any standard
simulation software package, such as AspenTech HYSYS[supreg], or API
4679 AMINECalc, that uses the Peng-Robinson equation of state and
speciates CH4 and CO2 emissions. A minimum of the
parameters listed in paragraph (d)(4)(i) through (x) of this section,
as applicable, must be used to characterize emissions. If paragraph
(d)(4)(i) through (x) of this section indicates that an applicable
parameter must be measured, collect measurements reflective of
representative operating conditions over the time period covered by the
simulation. Determine all other applicable parameters in paragraph
(d)(4)(i) through (x) of this section by engineering estimate and
process knowledge based on best available data and, if necessary,
adjust parameters to represent the operating conditions over the time
period covered by the simulation. Determine the number of simulations
and associated time periods such that the simulations cover the entire
reporting year (i.e., if you calculate emissions using one simulation,
use representative parameters for the operating conditions over the
calendar year; if you use periodic simulations to cover the calendar
year, use parameters for the operating conditions over each
corresponding appropriate portion of the calendar year).
(i) Natural gas feed temperature, pressure, and flow rate (must be
measured).
(ii) Acid gas content of feed natural gas (must be measured).
(iii) Acid gas content of outlet natural gas.
(iv) CH4 content of feed natural gas (must be measured).
(v) CH4 content of outlet natural gas.
(vi) For NRU, nitrogen content of feed natural gas (must be
measured).
(vii) For NRU, nitrogen content of outlet natural gas.
(viii) Unit operating hours, excluding downtime for maintenance or
standby.
(ix) Exit temperature of natural gas.
(x) For AGR, solvent type, pressure, temperature, circulation rate,
and composition.
(5) Flow rate of inlet. For Calculation Method 3, determine the gas
flow rate of the inlet when using Equation W-4A or W-4C of this section
or the gas flow rate of the outlet when using Equation W-4B or W-4C of
this section for the natural gas stream of an AGR or NRU using a meter
according to methods set forth in Sec. 98.234(b). If you do not have a
continuous flow meter, either install a continuous flow meter or use an
engineering calculation to determine the flow rate.
(6) Composition of vent gas. For Calculation Method 2 or
Calculation Method 3 when using Equation W-4A or W-4B of this section,
if a continuous gas analyzer is not available on the vent stack, either
install a continuous gas analyzer or take quarterly gas samples from
the vent gas stream for each quarter that the AGR or NRU is operating
to determine Voli in Equation W-3 of this section or Equation W-4A or
W-4B of this section, according to the methods set forth in Sec.
98.234(b).
(7) Composition of inlet gas stream. For Calculation Method 3, if a
continuous gas analyzer is installed on the inlet gas stream, then the
continuous gas analyzer results must be used. If a continuous gas
analyzer is not available, either install a continuous gas analyzer or
take quarterly gas samples from the inlet gas stream for each quarter
that the AGR or NRU is operating to determine VolI,i in Equation W-4A,
W-4B, or W-4C of this section, according to the methods set forth in
Sec. 98.234(b).
(8) Composition of outlet gas stream. For Calculation Method 3,
determine annual average volumetric fraction of GHGi (either
CH4 or CO2) content in natural gas flowing out of
the AGR or NRU using one of the methods specified in paragraphs
(d)(8)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) If a continuous gas analyzer is installed on the outlet natural
gas stream, then the continuous gas analyzer results must be used. If a
continuous gas analyzer is not available, you may install a continuous
gas analyzer.
(ii) If a continuous gas analyzer is not available or installed,
quarterly gas samples may be taken from the outlet natural gas stream
for each quarter that the AGR or NRU is operating to
[[Page 50389]]
determine VolO,i in Equation W-4A, W-4B, or W-4C of this
section, according to the methods set forth in Sec. 98.234(b).
(iii) If a continuous gas analyzer is not available or installed,
you may use the outlet pipeline quality specification for
CO2 in natural gas and the outlet quality specification for
CH4 in natural gas.
(9) Volumetric emissions. Calculate annual volumetric
CH4 and CO2 emissions at standard conditions
using calculations in paragraph (t) of this section.
(10) Mass emissions. Calculate annual mass CH4 and
CO2 emissions using calculations in paragraph (v) of this
section.
(11) Emissions recovered and transferred outside the facility.
Determine if CO2 emissions from the AGR are recovered and
transferred outside the facility. Adjust the CO2 emissions
estimated in paragraphs (d)(1) through (d)(10) of this section downward
by the magnitude of CO2 emissions recovered and transferred
outside the facility.
(e) Dehydrator vents. For dehydrator vents, calculate annual
CH4 and CO2 emissions using the applicable
calculation methods described in paragraphs (e)(1) through (5) of this
section. For glycol dehydrators that have an annual average daily
natural gas throughput that is greater than or equal to 0.4 million
standard cubic feet per day, use Calculation Method 1 in paragraph
(e)(1) of this section. For glycol dehydrators that have an annual
average of daily natural gas throughput that is greater than 0 million
standard cubic feet per day and less than 0.4 million standard cubic
feet per day, use either Calculation Method 1 in paragraph (e)(1) of
this section or Calculation Method 2 in paragraph (e)(2) of this
section. If you are required to or elect to use the method in paragraph
(e)(1) of this section, you must use the results of the model to
determine annual mass emissions. If emissions from dehydrator vents are
routed to a vapor recovery system, you must adjust the emissions
downward according to paragraph (e)(4) of this section. If emissions
from dehydrator vents are routed to a regenerator firebox/fire tubes,
you must calculate CH4, CO2, and N2O
annual emissions as specified in paragraph (e)(5) of this section. If
any dehydrator vents are routed to a flare, you must calculate
CH4, CO2, and N2O emissions for the
flare stack as specified in paragraph (n) of this section and report
emissions from the flare as specified in Sec. 98.236(n).
(1) Calculation Method 1. Calculate annual mass emissions from
glycol dehydrators by using a software program, such as AspenTech
HYSYS[supreg], Bryan Research & Engineering ProMax[supreg], or GRI-
GLYCalcTM, that uses the Peng-Robinson equation of state to calculate
the equilibrium coefficient, speciates CH4 and
CO2 emissions from dehydrators, and has provisions to
include regenerator control devices, a separator flash tank, stripping
gas, and a gas injection pump or gas assist pump. If you elect to use
ProMax[supreg], you must use version 5.0 or above. Emissions must be
modeled from both the still vent and, if applicable, the flash tank
vent. A minimum of the parameters listed in paragraph (e)(1)(i) through
(xi) of this section, as applicable, must be used to characterize
emissions. If paragraph (e)(1)(i) through (xi) of this section
indicates that an applicable parameter must be measured, collect
measurements reflective of representative operating conditions for the
time period covered by the simulation. Determine all other applicable
parameters in paragraph (e)(1)(i) through (xi) of this section by
engineering estimate and process knowledge based on best available data
and, if necessary, adjust parameters to represent the operating
conditions over the time period covered by the simulation. Determine
the number of simulations and associated time periods such that the
simulations cover the entire reporting year (i.e., if you calculate
emissions using one simulation, use representative parameters for the
operating conditions over the calendar year; if you use periodic
simulations to cover the calendar year, use parameters for the
operating conditions over each corresponding appropriate portion of the
calendar year).
(i) Feed natural gas flow rate (must be measured).
(ii) Feed natural gas water content (must be measured).
* * * * *
(x) Wet natural gas temperature and pressure at the absorber inlet
(must be measured).
(xi) Wet natural gas composition. Measure this parameter using one
of the methods described in paragraphs (e)(1)(xi)(A) and (B) of this
section.
(A) Use an appropriate standard method published by a consensus-
based standards organization if such a method exists or you may use an
industry standard practice as specified in Sec. 98.234(b) to sample
and analyze wet natural gas composition.
(B) If only composition data for dry natural gas is available,
assume the wet natural gas is saturated.
(2) Calculation Method 2. Calculate annual volumetric emissions
from glycol dehydrators using Equation W-5 of this section, and then
calculate the collective CH4 and CO2 mass
emissions from the volumetric emissions using the procedures in
paragraph (v) of this section:
* * * * *
Count = Total number of glycol dehydrators that have an annual average
daily natural gas throughput that is greater than 0 million standard
cubic feet per day and less than 0.4 million standard cubic feet per
day for which you elect to use this Calculation Method 2.
* * * * *
(3) Calculation Method 3. For dehydrators of any size that use
desiccant, you must calculate emissions from the amount of gas vented
from the vessel when it is depressurized for the desiccant refilling
process using Equation W-6 of this section. From volumetric natural gas
emissions, calculate both CH4 and CO2 volumetric
and mass emissions using the procedures in paragraphs (u) and (v) of
this section. Desiccant dehydrator emissions covered in this paragraph
do not have to be calculated separately using the method specified in
paragraph (i) of this section for blowdown vent stacks.
* * * * *
(4) Emissions vented directly to atmosphere from dehydrators routed
to a vapor recovery system, flare, or regenerator firebox/fire tubes.
If the dehydrator(s) has a vapor recovery system, routes emissions to a
flare, or routes emissions to a regenerator firebox/fire tubes and you
use Calculation Method 1 or Calculation Method 2 in paragraph (e)(1) or
(2) of this section, calculate annual emissions vented directly to
atmosphere from the dehydrator(s) during periods of time when emissions
were not routed to the vapor recovery system, flare, or regenerator
firebox/fire tubes as specified in paragraphs (e)(4)(i) and (ii) of
this section. If the dehydrator(s) has a vapor recovery system or
routes emissions to a flare and you use Calculation Method 3 in
paragraph (e)(3) of this section, calculate annual emissions vented
directly to atmosphere from the dehydrator(s) during periods of time
when emissions were not routed to the vapor recovery system or flare as
specified in paragraph (e)(4)(iii) of this section.
(i) When emissions from dehydrator(s) are calculated using
Calculation Method 1 or 2, calculate maximum potential annual vented
emissions as specified in paragraph
[[Page 50390]]
(e)(1) or (2) of this section, and calculate an average hourly vented
emissions rate by dividing the maximum potential annual vented
emissions by the number of hours that the dehydrator was in operation.
(ii) To calculate total emissions vented directly to atmosphere
during periods when the dehydrator was not routing emissions to a vapor
recovery system, flare, or regenerator firebox/fire tubes for
dehydrator(s) with emissions calculated using Calculation Method 1 or
2, multiply the average hourly vented emissions rate determined in
paragraph (e)(4)(i) of this section by the number of hours that the
dehydrator vented directly to the atmosphere. Determine the number of
hours that the dehydrator vented directly to atmosphere by subtracting
the hours that the dehydrator was connected to a vapor recovery system,
flare, or regenerator firebox/fire tubes (based on engineering estimate
and best available data) from the total operating hours for the
dehydrator in the calendar year. You must take into account periods
with reduced capture efficiency of the vapor recovery system, flare, or
regenerator firebox/fire tubes. If emissions are routed to a flare but
the flare is unlit, calculate emissions in accordance with the
methodology specified in paragraph (n) of this section and report
emissions from the flare as specified in Sec. 98.236(n).
(iii) When emissions from dehydrator(s) are calculated using
Calculation Method 3, calculate total annual emissions vented directly
to atmosphere from the dehydrator(s) during periods of time when
emissions were not routed to the vapor recovery system, flare, or
regenerator firebox/fire tubes by determining of the number of
depressurization events (including portions of an event) that vented to
atmosphere based on engineering estimate and best available data. You
must take into account periods with reduced capture efficiency of the
vapor recovery system or flare. If emissions are routed to a flare but
the flare is unlit, calculate emissions in accordance with the
methodology specified in paragraph (n) of this section and report
emissions from the flare as specified in Sec. 98.236(n).
(5) Combustion emissions from routing to regenerator firebox/fire
tubes. If any dehydrator emissions are routed to a regenerator firebox/
fire tubes, calculate emissions from these devices attributable to
dehydrator flash tank vents or still vents as specified in paragraphs
(e)(5)(i) through (iii) of this section. If you operate a CEMS to
monitor the emissions from the regenerator firebox/fire tubes,
calculate emissions as specified in paragraph (e)(5)(iv) of this
section.
(i) Determine the volume of the total emissions that is routed to a
regenerator firebox/fire tubes as specified in paragraph (e)(5)(i)(A)
or (B) of this section.
(A) Measure the flow from the dehydrator(s) to the regenerator
firebox/fire tubes using a continuous flow measurement device. If you
continuously measure flow to the regenerator firebox/fire tubes, you
must use the measured volumes to calculate emissions from the
regenerator firebox/fire tubes.
(B) Using engineering estimates based on best available data,
determine the volume of the total emissions estimated in paragraph
(e)(1), (2), or (3) of this section, as applicable, that is routed to
the regenerator firebox/fire tubes.
(ii) Determine composition of the gas routed to a regenerator
firebox/fire tubes as specified in paragraph (e)(5)(ii)(A) or (B) of
this section.
(A) Use the appropriate vent emissions as determined in paragraph
(e)(1) or (2) of this section.
(B) Measure the composition of the gas from the dehydrator(s) to
the regenerator firebox/fire tubes using a continuous composition
analyzer. If you continuously measure gas composition, then those
measured data must be used to calculate dehydrator emissions from the
regenerator firebox/fire tubes.
(iii) Determine GHG volumetric emissions at actual conditions from
the regenerator firebox/fire tubes using Equations W-39A, W-39B, and W-
40 in paragraph (z)(3) of this section. Calculate GHG volumetric
emissions at standard conditions using calculations in paragraph (t) of
this section. Calculate both GHG mass emissions from volumetric
emissions using calculations in paragraph (v) of this section.
(iv) If you operate and maintain a CEMS that has both a
CO2 concentration monitor and volumetric flow rate monitor
for the combustion gases from the regenerator firebox/fire tubes, you
must calculate only CO2 emissions for the regenerator
firebox/fire tubes. You must follow the Tier 4 Calculation Method and
all associated calculation, quality assurance, reporting, and
recordkeeping requirements for Tier 4 in subpart C of this part
(General Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources). If a CEMS is used to
calculate emissions from a regenerator firebox/fire tubes, the
requirements specified in paragraphs (e)(5)(ii) and (iii) of this
section are not required.
(f) Well venting for liquids unloadings. Calculate annual
volumetric natural gas emissions from well venting for liquids
unloading when the well is unloaded to the atmosphere or a control
device using one of the calculation methods described in paragraph
(f)(1), (2), or (3) of this section. Once every 3 consecutive calendar
years or on a more frequent basis, you must use Calculation Method 1 to
calculate emissions from well venting for liquids unloading for each
well. Calculate annual CH4 and CO2 volumetric and
mass emissions using the method described in paragraph (f)(4) of this
section.
(1) Calculation Method 1. Calculate emissions from manual and
automated unloadings at wells with plunger lifts and wells without
plunger lifts separately. For at least one well of each unique well
tubing diameter group and pressure group combination in each sub-basin
category (see Sec. 98.238 for the definitions of tubing diameter
group, pressure group, and sub-basin category), where gas wells are
vented to the atmosphere to expel liquids accumulated in the tubing,
install a recording flow meter on the vent line used to vent gas from
the well (e.g., on the vent line off the wellhead separator or
atmospheric storage tank) according to methods set forth in Sec.
98.234(b). Calculate the total emissions from well venting to the
atmosphere for liquids unloading using Equation W-7A of this section.
Equation W-7A must be used for each unloading type combination
(automated plunger lift unloadings, manual plunger lift unloadings,
automated unloadings without plunger lifts and manual unloadings
without plunger lifts) for any tubing diameter group and pressure group
combination in each sub-basin.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.011
Where:
Ea = Annual natural gas emissions for each well of the
same tubing diameter group and pressure group combination in the
sub-basin at actual conditions, a, in
[[Page 50391]]
cubic feet. Calculate emissions from wells with automated plunger
lift unloadings, wells with manual plunger lift unloadings, wells
with automated unloadings without plunger lifts and wells with
manual unloadings without plunger lifts separately.
FR = Average flow rate in cubic feet per hour for all measured wells
of the same tubing diameter group and pressure group combination in
a sub-basin, over the duration of the liquids unloading, under
actual conditions as determined in paragraph (f)(1)(i) of this
section.
Tp = Cumulative amount of time in hours of venting for
each well, p, of the same tubing diameter group and pressure group
combination in a sub-basin during the year. If the available venting
data do not contain a record of the date of the venting events and
data are not available to provide the venting hours for the specific
time period of January 1 to December 31, you may calculate an
annualized vent time, Tp, using Equation W-7B of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.012
Where:
HRp = Cumulative amount of time in hours of venting for
each well, p, during the monitoring period.
MPp = Time period, in days, of the monitoring period for
each well, p. A minimum of 300 days in a calendar year are required.
The next period of data collection must start immediately following
the end of data collection for the previous reporting year.
Dp = Time period, in days during which the well, p, was
in production (365 if the well was in production for the entire
year).
(i) Determine the well vent average flow rate (``FR'' in Equation
W-7A of this section) as specified in paragraphs (f)(1)(i)(A) through
(C) of this section for at least one well in a unique well tubing
diameter group and pressure group combination in each sub-basin
category. Calculate emissions from wells with automated plunger lift
unloadings, wells with manual plunger lift unloadings, wells with
automated unloadings without plunger lifts and wells with manual
unloadings without plunger lifts separately.
(A) Calculate the average flow rate per hour of venting for each
unique tubing diameter group and pressure group combination in each
sub-basin category by dividing the recorded total annual flow by the
recorded time (in hours) for all measured liquid unloading events with
venting to the atmosphere or a control device.
(B) Apply the average hourly flow rate calculated under paragraph
(f)(1)(i)(A) of this section to each well in the same pressure group
that have the same tubing diameter group, for the number of hours of
each well is vented.
(C) If using Calculation Method 1 more frequently than once every 3
years, you must calculate a new average flow rate each calendar year
that you use Calculation Method 1. For a new producing sub-basin
category, calculate an average flow rate beginning in the first year of
production.
(ii) Calculate natural gas volumetric emissions at standard
conditions using calculations in paragraph (t) of this section.
(2) Calculation Method 2. Calculate the total emissions for each
well from manual and automated well venting to the atmosphere for
liquids unloading without plunger lift assist using Equation W-8 of
this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.013
Where:
Es = Annual natural gas emissions for each well at
standard conditions, s, in cubic feet per year
Np = Total number of unloading events in the monitoring
period per well, p.
0.37 x 10-\3\ = {3.14 (pi)/4{time} /{14.7*144{time}
(psia converted to pounds per square feet).
CDp = Casing internal diameter for well, p, in inches.
WDp = Well depth from either the top of the well or the
lowest packer to the bottom of the well, for well, p, in feet.
SPp = For well, p, shut-in pressure or surface
pressure for wells with tubing production, or casing pressure for
each well with no packers, in pounds per square inch absolute
(psia). If casing pressure is not available for the well, you may
determine the casing pressure by multiplying the tubing pressure of
the well with a ratio of casing pressure to tubing pressure from a
well in the same sub-basin for which the casing pressure is known.
The tubing pressure must be measured during gas flow to a flow-line.
The shut-in pressure, surface pressure, or casing pressure must be
determined just prior to liquids unloading when the well production
is impeded by liquids loading or closed to the flow-line by surface
valves.
SFRp = Average flow-line rate of gas for well, p, at
standard conditions in cubic feet per hour. Use Equation W-33 of
this section to calculate the average flow-line rate at standard
conditions.
HRp,q = Hours that well, p, was left open to the
atmosphere during each unloading event, q.
1.0 = Hours for average well to blowdown casing volume at shut-in
pressure.
q = Unloading event.
Zp,q = If HRp,q is less than 1.0 then
Zp,q is equal to 0. If HRp,q is greater than
or equal to 1.0 then Zp,q is equal to 1.
(3) Calculation Method 3. Calculate the total emissions for each
sub-basin from well venting to the atmosphere for liquids unloading
with plunger lift assist using Equation W-9 of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.014
[[Page 50392]]
Where:
Es = Annual natural gas emissions for each well at
standard conditions, s, in cubic feet per year.
Np = Total number of unloading events in the monitoring
period per well, p.
0.37 x 10-\3\ = {3.14 (pi)/4{time} /{14.7*144{time}
(psia converted to pounds per square feet).
TDp = Tubing internal diameter for well, p, in inches.
WDp = Tubing depth to plunger bumper for well, p, in
feet.
SPp = Flow-line pressure for well p in pounds per square
inch absolute (psia), using engineering estimate based on best
available data.
SFRp = Average flow-line rate of gas for well, p, at
standard conditions in cubic feet per hour. Use Equation W-33 of
this section to calculate the average flow-line rate at standard
conditions.
HRp,q = Hours that well, p, was left open to the
atmosphere during each unloading event, q.
0.5 = Hours for average well to blowdown tubing volume at flow-line
pressure.
q = Unloading event.
Zp,q = If HRp,q is less than 0.5 then
Zp,q is equal to 0. If HRp,q is greater than
or equal to 0.5 then Zp,q is equal to 1.
(4) Volumetric and mass emissions. Calculate CH4 and
CO2 volumetric and mass emissions from volumetric natural
gas emissions using calculations in paragraphs (u) and (v) of this
section.
* * * * *
(g) Well venting during completions and workovers with hydraulic
fracturing. Calculate annual volumetric natural gas emissions from gas
well and oil well venting during completions and workovers involving
hydraulic fracturing using Equation W-10A or Equation W-10B of this
section. Equation W-10A applies to well venting when the gas flowback
rate is measured from a specified number of example completions or
workovers in a sub-basin and well type combination and Equation W-10B
applies when the gas flowback vent or flare volume is measured for each
completion or workover in a sub-basin and well type combination.
Completion and workover activities are separated into two periods, an
initial period when flowback is routed to open pits or tanks and a
subsequent period when gas content is sufficient to route the flowback
to a separator or when the gas content is sufficient to allow
measurement by the devices specified in paragraph (g)(1) of this
section, regardless of whether a separator is actually utilized. If you
elect to use Equation W-10A, you must follow the procedures specified
in paragraph (g)(1) of this section. If you elect to use Equation W-
10B, you must use a recording flow meter installed on the vent line,
downstream of a separator and ahead of a flare or vent, to measure the
gas flowback. For either equation, emissions must be calculated
separately for completions and workovers, for each sub-basin, and for
each well type combination identified in paragraph (g)(2) of this
section. You must calculate CH4 and CO2
volumetric and mass emissions as specified in paragraph (g)(3) of this
section. If emissions from well venting during completions and
workovers with hydraulic fracturing are routed to a flare, you must
calculate CH4, CO2, and N2O annual
emissions as specified in paragraph (n) of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.016
Where:
Es,n = Annual volumetric natural gas emissions in
standard cubic feet from gas venting during well completions or
workovers following hydraulic fracturing for each well.
CW = Total number of completions or workovers using hydraulic
fracturing for each well, p.
Tp,s,cw = Cumulative amount of time of flowback, after
sufficient quantities of gas are present to enable separation, where
gas vented or flared for each completion or workover, in hours, for
each well, p, during the reporting year. This may include non-
contiguous periods of venting or flaring.
Tp,i,cw = Cumulative amount of time of flowback to open
tanks/pits, from when gas is first detected until sufficient
quantities of gas are present to enable separation, for each
completion or workover, in hours, for each well, p, during the
reporting year. This may include non-contiguous periods of routing
to open tanks/pits but does not include periods when the oil well
ceases to produce fluids to the surface.
FRMs = Ratio of average gas flowback, during the period
when sufficient quantities of gas are present to enable separation,
of well completions and workovers from hydraulic fracturing to 30-
day production rate for the sub-basin and well type combination,
calculated using procedures specified in paragraph (g)(1)(iii) of
this section.
FRMi = Ratio of initial gas flowback rate during well
completions and workovers from hydraulic fracturing to 30-day gas
production rate for the sub-basin and well type combination,
calculated using procedures specified in paragraph (g)(1)(iv) of
this section, for the period of flow to open tanks/pits.
PRs,p,cw = Average gas production flow rate during the
first 30 days of production after each completion of a newly drilled
well or well workover using hydraulic fracturing in standard cubic
feet per hour of each well p, that was measured in the sub-basin and
well type combination. If applicable, PRs,p,cw may be
calculated for oil wells using procedures specified in paragraph
(g)(1)(vii) of this section.
EnFs,p,cw = Volume of N2 injected gas in cubic
feet at standard conditions that was injected into the reservoir
during an energized fracture job or during flowback during each
completion or workover for each well, p, as determined by using an
appropriate meter according to methods described in Sec. 98.234(b),
or by using receipts of gas purchases that are used for the
energized fracture job or injection during flowback. Convert to
standard conditions using paragraph (t) of this section. If the
fracture process did not inject gas into the reservoir or if the
injected gas is CO2 then EnFs,p,cw is 0.
FVs,p,cw = Flow volume of vented or flared gas for each
completion or workover at each well, p, in standard cubic feet
measured using a recording flow meter (digital or analog) on the
vent line to measure gas flowback during the separation period of
the completion or workover according to methods set forth in Sec.
98.234(b).
FRp,i,cw = Flow rate vented or flared of each completion
or workover for each well, p, in standard cubic feet per hour
measured using a recording flow meter (digital or analog) on the
vent line to measure the flowback, at the beginning of the period of
time when sufficient quantities of gas are present to enable
separation, of the completion or workover according to methods set
forth in Sec. 98.234(b).
[[Page 50393]]
(1) If you elect to use Equation W-10A of this section on gas
wells, you must use Calculation Method 1 as specified in paragraph
(g)(1)(i) of this section to determine the value of FRMs and
FRMi. These values must be based on the flow rate for
flowback gases, once sufficient gas is present to enable separation.
The number of measurements or calculations required to estimate
FRMs and FRMi must be determined individually for
completions and workovers per sub-basin and well type combination as
follows: Complete measurements or calculations for at least one
completion or workover for less than or equal to 25 completions or
workovers for each well type combination within a sub-basin; complete
measurements or calculations for at least two completions or workovers
for 26 to 50 completions or workovers for each sub-basin and well type
combination; complete measurements or calculations for at least three
completions or workovers for 51 to 100 completions or workovers for
each sub-basin and well type combination; complete measurements or
calculations for at least four completions or workovers for 101 to 250
completions or workovers for each sub-basin and well type combination;
and complete measurements or calculations for at least five completions
or workovers for greater than 250 completions or workovers for each
sub-basin and well type combination.
* * * * *
(iii) * * *
FRs,p = Measured average gas flowback rate from Calculation
Method 1 described in paragraph (g)(1)(i) of this section, during the
separation period in standard cubic feet per hour for well(s) p for
each sub-basin and well type combination. Convert measured
FRa values from actual conditions upstream of the
restriction orifice (FRa) to standard conditions
(FRs,p) for each well p using Equation W-33 in paragraph (t)
of this section. You may not use flow volume as used in Equation W-10B
of this section converted to a flow rate for this parameter.
* * * * *
N = Number of measured well completions or workovers using hydraulic
fracturing in a sub-basin and well type combination.
(iv) * * *
FRi,p = Initial measured gas flowback rate from Calculation
Method 1 described in paragraph (g)(1)(i) of this section in standard
cubic feet per hour for well(s), p, for each sub-basin and well type
combination. Measured FRi,p values must be based on flow
conditions at the beginning of the separation period and must be
expressed at standard conditions.
* * * * *
N = Number of measured well completions or workovers using hydraulic
fracturing in a sub-basin and well type combination.
* * * * *
(h) Gas well venting during completions and workovers without
hydraulic fracturing. Calculate annual volumetric natural gas emissions
from each gas well venting during workovers without hydraulic
fracturing using Equation W-13A of this section. Calculate annual
volumetric natural gas emissions from each gas well venting during
completions without hydraulic fracturing using Equation W-13B of this
section. You must convert annual volumetric natural gas emissions to
CH4 and CO2 volumetric and mass emissions as
specified in paragraph (h)(1) of this section. If emissions from gas
well venting during completions and workovers without hydraulic
fracturing are routed to a flare, you must calculate CH4,
CO2, and N2O annual emissions as specified in
paragraph (n) of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.018
Where:
Es,wo = Annual volumetric natural gas emissions in
standard cubic feet from gas well venting during well workovers
without hydraulic fracturing.
Nwo = Number of workovers per well that do not involve
hydraulic fracturing in the reporting year.
EFwo = Emission factor for non-hydraulic fracture well
workover venting in standard cubic feet per workover. Use 3,114
standard cubic feet natural gas per well workover without hydraulic
fracturing.
Es,p = Annual volumetric natural gas emissions in
standard cubic feet from gas well venting during well completions
without hydraulic fracturing.
Vp = Average daily gas production rate in standard cubic
feet per hour for each well, p, undergoing completion without
hydraulic fracturing. This is the total annual gas production volume
divided by total number of hours the well produced to the flow-line.
For completed wells that have not established a production rate, you
may use the average flow rate from the first 30 days of production.
In the event that the well is completed less than 30 days from the
end of the calendar year, the first 30 days of the production
straddling the current and following calendar years shall be used.
Tp = Time that gas is vented to either the atmosphere or
a flare for each well, p, undergoing completion without hydraulic
fracturing, in hours during the year.
* * * * *
(i) * * *
(2) Method for determining emissions from blowdown vent stacks
according to equipment or event type. If you elect to determine
emissions according to each equipment or event type, using unique
physical volumes as calculated in paragraph (i)(1) of this section, you
must calculate emissions as specified in paragraph (i)(2)(i) of this
section and either paragraph (i)(2)(ii) of this section or, if
applicable, paragraph (i)(2)(iii) of this section for each equipment or
event type. Categorize equipment and event types for each industry
segment as specified in paragraph (i)(2)(iv) of this section.
(i) * * *
Ta = Temperature at actual conditions in the unique physical
volume ([deg]F). For emergency blowdowns at onshore petroleum and
natural gas production, onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities, onshore natural gas transmission pipeline
facilities, and natural gas distribution facilities, engineering
estimates based on best available information may be used to determine
the temperature.
* * * * *
Pa = Absolute pressure at actual conditions in the unique
physical volume (psia). For emergency blowdowns at onshore petroleum
and natural gas production, onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering
and boosting facilities, onshore natural gas transmission pipeline
[[Page 50394]]
facilities, and natural gas distribution facilities, engineering
estimates based on best available information may be used to determine
the pressure.
* * * * *
Ta,p = Temperature at actual conditions in the unique
physical volume ([deg]F) for each blowdown ``p''. For emergency
blowdowns at onshore petroleum and natural gas production, onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting facilities, onshore
natural gas transmission pipeline facilities, and natural gas
distribution facilities, engineering estimates based on best available
information may be used to determine the temperature.
* * * * *
Pa,b,p = Absolute pressure at actual conditions in the
unique physical volume (psia) at the beginning of the blowdown ``p''.
For emergency blowdowns at onshore petroleum and natural gas
production, onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities, onshore natural gas transmission pipeline facilities, and
natural gas distribution facilities, engineering estimates based on
best available information may be used to determine the pressure at the
beginning of the blowdown.
Pa,e,p = Absolute pressure at actual conditions in the
unique physical volume (psia) at the end of the blowdown ``p''; 0 if
blowdown volume is purged using non-GHG gases. For emergency blowdowns
at onshore petroleum and natural gas production, onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting facilities, onshore natural gas
transmission pipeline facilities, and natural gas distribution
facilities, engineering estimates based on best available information
may be used to determine the pressure at the end of the blowdown.
* * * * *
(iv) Categorize blowdown vent stack emission events as specified in
paragraphs (i)(2)(iv)(A) and (B) of this section, as applicable.
(A) For the onshore petroleum and natural gas production, onshore
natural gas processing, onshore natural gas transmission compression,
underground natural gas storage, LNG storage, LNG import and export
equipment, and onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segments, equipment or event types must be grouped into the
following seven categories: Facility piping (i.e., physical volumes
associated with piping for which the entire physical volume is located
within the facility boundary), pipeline venting (i.e., physical volumes
associated with pipelines for which a portion of the physical volume is
located outside the facility boundary and the remainder, including the
blowdown vent stack, is located within the facility boundary),
compressors, scrubbers/strainers, pig launchers and receivers,
emergency shutdowns (this category includes emergency shutdown blowdown
emissions regardless of equipment type), and all other equipment with a
physical volume greater than or equal to 50 cubic feet. If a blowdown
event resulted in emissions from multiple equipment types and the
emissions cannot be apportioned to the different equipment types, then
categorize the blowdown event as the equipment type that represented
the largest portion of the emissions for the blowdown event.
(B) For the onshore natural gas transmission pipeline and natural
gas distribution industry segments, pipeline segments or event types
must be grouped into the following eight categories: Pipeline integrity
work (e.g., the preparation work of modifying facilities, ongoing
assessments, maintenance or mitigation), traditional operations or
pipeline maintenance, equipment replacement or repair (e.g., valves),
pipe abandonment, new construction or modification of pipelines
including commissioning and change of service, operational precaution
during activities (e.g. excavation near pipelines), emergency shutdowns
including pipeline incidents as defined in 49 CFR 191.3, and all other
pipeline segments with a physical volume greater than or equal to 50
cubic feet. If a blowdown event resulted in emissions from multiple
categories and the emissions cannot be apportioned to the different
categories, then categorize the blowdown event in the category that
represented the largest portion of the emissions for the blowdown
event.
* * * * *
(j) Hydrocarbon liquids and produced water storage tanks. Calculate
CH4, CO2, and N2O (when flared)
emissions from atmospheric pressure storage tanks receiving hydrocarbon
liquids or produced water from onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facilities, onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities (including stationary liquid storage not owned or
operated by the reporter), and onshore natural gas processing
facilities as specified in this paragraph (j). For wells, gas-liquid
separators, or onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
or onshore natural gas processing non-separator equipment (e.g.,
stabilizers, slug catchers) with annual average daily throughput of
hydrocarbon liquids greater than or equal to 10 barrels per day,
calculate annual CH4 and CO2 using Calculation
Method 1 or 2 as specified in paragraphs (j)(1) and (2) of this
section. For wells, gas-liquid separators, or non-separator equipment
with annual average daily throughput of hydrocarbon liquids greater
than 0 barrels per day and less than 10 barrels per day, calculate
annual CH4 and CO2 emissions using Calculation
Method 1, 2, or 3 as specified in paragraphs (j)(1) through (3) of this
section. Annual average daily throughput of hydrocarbon liquids should
be calculated using the flow out of the separator, well, or non-
separator equipment determined over the actual days of operation. For
atmospheric pressure storage tanks receiving produced water, calculate
annual CH4 emissions using Calculation Method 1, 2, or 3 as
specified in paragraphs (j)(1) through (3) of this section. If you are
required to or elect to use the method in paragraph (j)(1) of this
section, you must use the results of the model to determine annual
CH4 and, if applicable, CO2 emissions. If you use
Calculation Method 1 or Calculation Method 2 for gas-liquid separators,
you must also calculate emissions that may have occurred due to dump
valves not closing properly using the method specified in paragraph
(j)(5) of this section. If emissions from atmospheric pressure storage
tanks are routed to a vapor recovery system, you must calculate
CH4 and CO2 annual emissions as specified in
paragraph (j)(4) of this section. If emissions from atmospheric
pressure storage tanks are routed to a flare, determine flared
emissions in accordance with the methodology specified in paragraph (n)
of this section and report emissions from the flare as specified in
Sec. 98.236(n). For atmospheric pressure storage tanks routing
emissions to a vapor recovery system or a flare, calculate annual
emissions vented directly to atmosphere as specified in paragraph
(j)(4) of this section.
(1) Calculation Method 1. For atmospheric pressure storage tanks
receiving hydrocarbon liquids, calculate annual CH4 and
CO2 emissions using operating conditions in the well, last
gas-liquid separator, or last non-separator equipment before liquid
transfer to storage tanks. For atmospheric pressure storage tanks
receiving produced water, calculate annual CH4 emissions
using operating
[[Page 50395]]
conditions in the well, last gas-liquid separator, or last non-
separator equipment before liquid transfer to storage tanks. Calculate
flashing emissions with a software program, such as AspenTech
HYSYS[supreg], Bryan Research & Engineering ProMax[supreg], or, for
atmospheric pressure storage tanks receiving hydrocarbon liquids from
gas-liquid separator or non-separator equipment, API 4697 E&P Tank,
that uses the Peng-Robinson equation of state, models flashing
emissions, and speciates CH4 and CO2 emissions
that will result when the hydrocarbon liquids or produced water from
the well, separator, or non-separator equipment enter an atmospheric
pressure storage tank. If you elect to use ProMax[supreg], you must use
version 5.0 or above. A minimum of the parameters listed in paragraphs
(j)(1)(i) through (vii) of this section, as applicable, must be used to
characterize emissions. If paragraphs (j)(1)(i) through (vii) of this
section indicates that an applicable parameter must be measured,
collect measurements reflective of representative operating conditions
for the time period covered by the simulation. Determine all other
applicable parameters in paragraphs (j)(1)(i) through (vii) of this
section by engineering estimate and process knowledge based on best
available data and, if necessary, adjust parameters to represent the
operating conditions over the time period covered by the simulation.
Determine the number of simulations and associated time periods such
that the simulations cover the entire reporting year (i.e., if you
calculate emissions using one simulation, use representative parameters
for the operating conditions over the calendar year; if you use
periodic simulations to cover the calendar year, use parameters for the
operating conditions over each corresponding appropriate portion of the
calendar year).
(i) Well, separator, or non-separator equipment temperature (must
be measured).
(ii) Well, separator, or non-separator equipment pressure (must be
measured).
(iii) For atmospheric pressure storage tanks receiving hydrocarbon
liquids, sales or stabilized hydrocarbon liquids API gravity (must be
measured).
(iv) Sales or stabilized hydrocarbon liquids or produced water
production rate (must be measured).
(v) Ambient air temperature.
(vi) Ambient air pressure.
(vii) Well, separator, or non-separator equipment hydrocarbon
liquids or produced water composition and Reid vapor pressure (must be
measured). Use an appropriate standard method published by a consensus-
based standards organization if such a method exists or you may use an
industry standard practice as specified in Sec. 98.234(b) to sample
and analyze hydrocarbon liquids or produced water composition and Reid
vapor pressure.
(2) Calculation Method 2. For atmospheric pressure storage tanks
receiving hydrocarbon liquids, calculate annual CH4 and
CO2 emissions using the methods in paragraph (j)(2)(i) of
this section. For atmospheric pressure storage tanks receiving produced
water, calculate annual CH4 emissions using the methods in
paragraph (j)(2)(i) of this section.
(i) Assume that all of the CH4 and, if applicable,
CO2 in solution at well, separator, or non-separator
equipment temperature and pressure is emitted from hydrocarbon liquids
or produced water sent to atmosphere pressure storage tanks. You may
use an appropriate standard method published by a consensus-based
standards organization if such a method exists or you may use an
industry standard practice as described in Sec. 98.234(b) to sample
and analyze hydrocarbon liquids or produced water composition at well,
separator, or non-separator pressure and temperature.
(ii) [Reserved]
(3) Calculation Method 3. Calculate CH4 and
CO2 emissions from atmospheric pressure storage tanks
receiving hydrocarbon liquids as specified in paragraph (j)(3)(i) of
this section. Calculate CH4 emissions from atmospheric
pressure storage tanks receiving produced water as specified in
paragraph (j)(3)(ii) of this section.
(i) Calculate CH4 and CO2 emissions from
atmospheric pressure storage tanks receiving hydrocarbon liquids using
Equation W-15A of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.019
Where:
Es,i = Annual total volumetric GHG emissions (either
CO2 or CH4) at standard conditions in cubic
feet.
EFi = Population emission factor for separators, wells,
or non-separator equipment in thousand standard cubic feet per
separator, well, or non-separator equipment per year, for crude oil
use 4.2 for CH4 and 2.8 for CO2 at 60 [deg]F
and 14.7 psia, and for gas condensate use 17.6 for CH4
and 2.8 for CO2 at 60 [deg]F and 14.7 psia.
Count = Total number of separators, wells, or non-separator
equipment with annual average daily throughput greater than 0
barrels per day and less than 10 barrels per day. Count only
separators, wells, or non-separator equipment that feed hydrocarbon
liquids directly to the atmospheric pressure storage tank for which
you elect to use this Calculation Method 3.
1,000 = Conversion from thousand standard cubic feet to standard
cubic feet.
(ii) Calculate CH4 emissions from atmospheric pressure storage
tanks receiving produced water using Equation W-15B of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.020
Where:
MassCH4 = Annual total CH4 emissions in metric
tons.
EFCH4 = Population emission factor for produced water in
metric tons CH4 per thousand barrels produced water per
year. For produced water streams from separators, wells, or non-
separator equipment with pressure less than or equal to 50 psi, use
0.0015. For produced water streams from separators, wells, or non-
separator equipment with pressure greater than 50 but less than or
equal to 250 psi, use 0.0142. For produced water streams from
separators, wells, or non-separator equipment with pressure greater
than 250 psi, use 0.0508. Pressure should be representative of
separators, wells, or non-separator equipment that feed produced
water directly to the atmosphere pressure storage tank.
FR = Annual flow rate of produced water to atmospheric pressure
storage tanks, in barrels.
0.001 = Conversion from barrels to thousand barrels.
(4) Routing to vapor recovery systems or flares. If the atmospheric
pressure storage tank receiving your hydrocarbon liquids or produced
water has a vapor recovery system or routes emissions to
[[Page 50396]]
a flare, calculate annual emissions vented directly to atmosphere from
the storage tank during periods of time when emissions were not routed
to the vapor recovery system or flare as specified in paragraph
(j)(4)(i) of this section. Determine recovered mass as specified in
paragraph (j)(4)(ii) of this section.
(i) For an atmospheric pressure storage tank that routes any
emissions to a vapor recovery system or a flare, calculate vented
emissions as specified in paragraphs (j)(4)(i)(A) through (E) of this
section.
(A) Calculate maximum potential vented emissions as specified in
paragraph (j)(1), (2), or (3) of this section, and calculate an average
hourly vented emissions rate by dividing the maximum potential vented
emissions by the number of hours that the tank was in operation.
(B) To calculate vented emissions during periods when the tank was
not routing emissions to a vapor recovery system or a flare, multiply
the average hourly vented emissions rate determined in paragraph
(j)(4)(i)(A) of this section by the number of hours that the tank
vented directly to the atmosphere. Determine the number of hours that
the tank vented directly to atmosphere by subtracting the hours that
the tank was connected to a vapor recovery system or flare (based on
engineering estimate and best available data) from the total operating
hours for the tank in the calendar year. If emissions are routed to a
flare but the flare is unlit, calculate emissions in accordance with
the methodology specified in paragraph (n) of this section and report
emissions from the flare as specified in Sec. 98.236(n).
(C) During periods when a thief hatch is open or not properly
seated and emissions from the tank are routed to a vapor recovery
system or a flare, assume the capture efficiency of the vapor recovery
system or a flare is 0 percent. To calculate vented emissions during
such periods, multiply the average hourly vented emissions rate
determined in paragraph (j)(4)(i)(A) of this section by the number of
hours that the thief hatch is open or not properly seated. Determine
the number of hours that the thief hatch is open or not properly seated
as specified in paragraph (j)(7) of this section.
(D) Calculate vented emissions not captured by the vapor recovery
system or a flare due to causes other than open or not properly seated
thief hatches based on best available data.
(E) Calculate total emissions vented directly to atmosphere as the
sum of the emissions calculated as specified in paragraphs (j)(4)(i)(B)
through (D) of this section.
(ii) Using engineering estimates based on best available data,
determine the portion of the total emissions estimated in paragraphs
(j)(1) through (3) of this section that is recovered using a vapor
recovery system. You must take into account periods with reduced
capture efficiency of the vapor recovery system (e.g., when a thief
hatch is open or not properly seated) when calculating mass recovered
as specified in paragraphs (j)(4)(i)(C) and (D) of this section.
(5) Gas-liquid separator dump valves. If you use Calculation Method
1 or Calculation Method 2 in paragraph (j)(1) or (2) of this section,
calculate emissions from occurrences of gas-liquid separator liquid
dump valves that did not close properly during the calendar year by
using Equation W-16 of this section. Determine the total time a dump
valve did not close properly in the calendar year (Tdv) as
specified in paragraph (j)(5)(i) of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.021
Where:
Es,i,dv = Annual volumetric GHG emissions (either
CO2 or CH4) at standard conditions in cubic
feet from atmospheric pressure storage tanks that resulted from the
dump valve on an associated gas-liquid separator that did not close
properly.
CFdv = Correction factor for tank emissions for time
period Tdv is 2.87 for crude oil production. Correction
factor for tank emissions for time period Tdv is 4.37 for
gas condensate production.
Es,i = Annual volumetric GHG emissions (either
CO2 or CH4) as determined in paragraphs (j)(1)
and (2) and, if applicable, (j)(4) of this section, in standard
cubic feet per year, from atmospheric pressure storage tanks with
dump valves on an associated gas-liquid separator that did not close
properly.
8,760 = Conversion to hourly emissions.
Tdv = Total time a dump valve did not close properly in
the calendar year as determined in paragraph (j)(5)(i) of this
section, in hours.
(i) You must perform a visual inspection of each gas-liquid
separator liquid dump valve to determine if the valve is stuck in an
open or partially open position, in accordance with paragraph
(j)(5)(i)(A) and (B) of this section.
(A) Visual inspections must be conducted at least once in a
calendar year.
(B) If stuck gas-liquid separator liquid dump valve is identified,
the dump valve must be counted as being open since the beginning of the
calendar year, or from the previous visual inspection that did not
identify the dump valve as being stuck in the open position in the same
calendar year. If the dump valve is fixed following visual inspection,
the time period for which the dump valve was stuck open will end upon
being repaired. If a stuck dump valve is identified and not repaired,
the time period for which the dump valve was stuck open must be counted
as having occurred through the rest of the calendar year.
(ii) [Reserved]
(6) Mass emissions. Calculate both CH4 and
CO2 mass emissions from natural gas volumetric emissions
using calculations in paragraph (v) of this section.
(7) Thief hatches. If a thief hatch sensor is operating on a
controlled atmospheric pressure storage tank, you must use data
obtained from the thief hatch sensor to determine periods when the
thief hatch is open or not properly seated. An applicable operating
thief hatch sensor must be capable of transmitting and logging data
whenever a thief hatch is open or not properly seated, as well as when
the thief hatch is subsequently closed. If a thief hatch sensor is not
operating, you must perform a visual inspection of each thief hatch on
a controlled atmospheric pressure storage tank in accordance with
paragraph (j)(7)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) For thief hatches on atmospheric pressure storage tanks subject
to the fugitive emissions standards for well sites, centralized
production facilities, and compressor stations in Sec. 60.5397b of
this chapter, or an applicable approved state plan or applicable
Federal plan in part 62 of this chapter, visual inspections must be
conducted at least as frequent as the required visual, audible, or
olfactory fugitive emissions components surveys described in Sec.
60.5397b or the applicable approved state plan or applicable Federal
plan in
[[Page 50397]]
part 62. If the time between required visual, audible, or olfactory
fugitive emissions components surveys described in Sec. 60.5397b or
the applicable approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in part
62 is greater than one year, visual inspections must be conducted at
least annually.
(ii) For thief hatches on atmospheric pressure storage tanks not
subject to the fugitive emissions standards for well sites, centralized
production facilities, and compressor stations in Sec. 60.5397b of
this chapter, or an applicable approved state plan or applicable
Federal plan in part 62 of this chapter, visual inspections must be
conducted at least once in a calendar year.
(iii) If one visual inspection is conducted in the calendar year,
assume the thief hatch was open for the entire calendar year. If
multiple visual inspections are conducted in the calendar year, assume
a thief hatch found open in the first visual inspection was open since
the beginning of the year until the date of the visual inspection;
assume a thief hatch found open in the last visual inspection of the
year was open from the preceding visual inspection through the end of
the year; assume a thief hatch found open in a visual inspection
between the first and last visual inspections of the year was open
since the preceding visual inspection until the date of the visual
inspection.
(k) Condensate storage tanks. For vent stacks connected to one or
more condensate storage tanks, either water or hydrocarbon, without
vapor recovery, flares, or other controls, in onshore natural gas
transmission compression or underground natural gas storage, calculate
CH4 and CO2 annual emissions from compressor
scrubber dump valve leakage as specified in paragraphs (k)(1) through
(4) of this section.
* * * * *
(l) Well testing venting and flaring. Calculate CH4 and
CO2 annual emissions from well testing venting as specified
in paragraphs (l)(1) through (5) of this section. If emissions from
well testing venting are routed to a flare, you must calculate
CH4, CO2, and N2O annual emissions as
specified in paragraph (n) of this section.
* * * * *
(3) Estimate venting emissions using Equation W-17A (for oil wells)
or Equation W-17B (for gas wells) of this section for each well tested
during the reporting year.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.023
Where:
Ea,n = Annual volumetric natural gas emissions from well
testing for each well being tested in cubic feet under actual
conditions.
GOR = Gas to oil ratio in cubic feet of gas per barrel of oil for
each well being tested; oil here refers to hydrocarbon liquids
produced of all API gravities.
FR = Average annual flow rate in barrels of oil per day for the oil
well being tested.
PR = Average annual production rate in actual cubic feet per day for
the gas well being tested.
D = Number of days during the calendar year that the well is tested.
* * * * *
(m) Associated gas venting and flaring. Calculate CH4
and CO2 annual emissions from associated gas venting not in
conjunction with well testing (refer to paragraph (l) of this section)
as specified in paragraphs (m)(1) through (4) of this section. If
emissions from associated gas venting are routed to a flare, you must
calculate CH4, CO2, and N2O annual
emissions as specified in paragraph (n) of this section.
* * * * *
(3) Estimate venting emissions using Equation W-18 of this section.
Alternatively, if you measure the flow to a vent using a continuous
flow measurement device, you must use the measured flow volumes to
calculate vented associated gas emissions.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.024
Where:
Es,n,p = Annual volumetric natural gas emissions at each
well from associated gas venting at standard conditions, in cubic
feet.
GORp = Gas to oil ratio, for well p, in standard cubic
feet of gas per barrel of oil; oil here refers to hydrocarbon
liquids produced of all API gravities.
Vp = Volume of oil produced, for well p, in barrels in
the calendar year only during time periods in which associated gas
was vented or flared.
SGp = Volume of associated gas sent to sales or volume of
associated gas used for other purposes at the facility site,
including powering engines, separators, safety systems and/or
combustion equipment and not flared or vented, for well p, in
standard cubic feet of gas in the calendar year only during time
periods in which associated gas was vented or flared.
* * * * *
(n) Flare stack emissions. Except as specified in paragraph (n)(9)
of this section, calculate CO2, CH4, and
N2O emissions from each flare stack as specified in
paragraphs (n)(1) through (8) of this section. For each flare,
disaggregate the total flared emissions to applicable source types as
specified in paragraph (n)(10) of this section.
(1) Flow measurement. Measure total flow to the flare as specified
in either paragraph (n)(1)(i) or (ii) of this section.
(i) Use a continuous parameter monitoring system for measuring the
flow of gas to the flare downstream of any sweep, purge, or auxiliary
gas addition. You may use direct flow meters or other parameter
monitoring systems combined with engineering calculations, such as line
pressure and burner nozzle dimensions, to satisfy this requirement. The
continuous parameter monitoring system must measure data values at
least once every hour.
(ii) Use a continuous parameter monitoring system for measuring the
flow of gas from each source that routes gas to the flare, including
purge gas, sweep gas, and auxiliary fuel. You may use direct flow
meters or other parameter monitoring systems combined with engineering
[[Page 50398]]
calculations, such as line pressure and burner nozzle dimensions, to
satisfy this requirement. If the emission streams for multiple sources
are routed to a manifold before being combined with other emission
streams, you may conduct the measurement in the manifold instead of
from each source that is routed to the manifold.
(2) Pilot. Continuously monitor for the presence of a pilot flame
or combustion flame as specified in paragraph (n)(2)(i) of this section
or visually inspect for the presence of a pilot flame or combustion
flame as specified in paragraph (n)(2)(ii) of this section. If you
continuously monitor, then periods when the flare are unlit must be
determined based on those data.
(i) At least once every five minutes monitor for the presence of a
pilot flame or combustion flame using a device (including, but not
limited to, a thermocouple, ultraviolet beam sensor, or infrared
sensor) capable of detecting that the pilot or combustion flame is
present at all times. Continuous monitoring systems used for the
presence of a pilot flame or combustion flame are not subject to a
minimum accuracy requirement beyond being able to detect the presence
or absence of a flame and are exempt from the calibration requirements
of this part 98. Track the length of time over all periods when the
flare is unlit. Use the measured flow during these time periods, as
determined from measurements obtained under paragraph (n)(1) of this
section, to calculate the fraction of the total annual volume that is
routed to the flare when it is unlit. If the monitoring device is out
of service for more than one week, then visually inspect for the
presence of a pilot flame or combustion flame at least once per week
for the first 4 weeks that a monitoring device is out of service or
until a repaired or new device is operational, whichever period is
shorter. If the continuous monitoring device is out of service for less
than one week, then at least one visual inspection must be conducted
during the outage. If a flame is not detected during a weekly visual
inspection, assume the pilot has been unlit since the previous
inspection or the last time the continuous monitoring device detected a
flame, and assume that the pilot remains unlit until a subsequent
inspection or continuous monitoring device detects a flame. If the
monitoring device outage lasts more than 4 weeks, then you may switch
to conducting inspections at least once per month in accordance with
paragraph (n)(2)(ii) of this section.
(ii) At least once per month visually inspect for the presence of a
pilot flame or combustion flame. If a flame is not detected, assume the
pilot has been unlit since the previous inspection and that it remains
unlit until a subsequent inspection detects a flame. Use the sum of the
measured flows, as determined from measurements obtained under
paragraph (n)(1) of this section, during all time periods when the
pilot was determined to be unlit, to calculate the fraction of the
total annual volume that is routed to the flare when it is unlit.
(3) Gas composition. Determine the composition of the inlet gas to
the flare as specified in either paragraph (n)(3)(i), (ii), (iii), or
(iv) of this section.
(i) Use a continuous gas composition analyzer on the inlet gas to
the flare burner downstream of any purge, sweep, or auxiliary fuel
addition to determine the annual average mole fractions of methane,
ethane, propane, butane, pentanes plus, and CO2.
(ii) Take samples of the inlet gas to the flare burner downstream
of any purge, sweep, or auxiliary fuel addition at least once every
quarter in which gas is routed to the flare and analyze for methane,
ethane, propane, butane, pentanes plus, and CO2
constituents, Determine the annual average concentration of each
constituent as the flow-weighted annual average of all measurements for
that constituent during the year.
(iii) Use a continuous gas composition analyzer on the emissions
streams from each emission source that routes gas to the flare. Also
take samples of purge gas, sweep gas, and auxiliary fuel at least
annually, and analyze for methane ethane, propane, butane, pentanes
plus, and CO2. If the emission streams for multiple sources
are routed to a manifold before being combined with other emission
streams, you may measure gas composition in the manifold instead of
from each source that is routed to the manifold. Determine the flow-
weighted annual average concentration of each constituent.
(iv) Take samples of the emission streams from each source that
routes gas to the flare at least once every quarter in which gas is
routed to the flare and analyze for methane, ethane, propane, butane,
pentanes plus, and CO2. Also take samples of purge gas,
sweep gas, and auxiliary fuel at least annually, and analyze for
methane, ethane, propane, butane, pentanes plus, and CO2. If
the emission streams for multiple sources are routed to a manifold
before being combined with other emission streams, you may measure gas
composition in the manifold instead of from each source that is routed
to the manifold. Determine the annual average concentration of each
constituent in each stream as the flow-weighted average of all
measurements for that constituent during the year.
(4) Combustion efficiency. Use the applicable default combustion
efficiency specified in paragraphs (n)(4)(i) through (iii) of this
section. If you change the Tier with which you comply during a year,
then use the applicable default combustion efficiencies in paragraphs
(n)(4)(i) through (iii) of this section for portions of the year during
which the different monitoring methodologies were used, and calculate a
time-weighted average combustion efficiency to report for the flare.
(i) Tier 1. If you monitor the flare as specified in Sec. 63.670
and Sec. 63.671 of this chapter, then use a default combustion
efficiency of 98 percent. The alternative means of emissions limitation
specified in Sec. 63.670(r) of this chapter do not apply for the
purposes of this paragraph (n). References to deviations in Sec.
63.670(b) of this chapter do not apply for the purposes of this
paragraph (n). References to refineries or refinery process units in
Sec. 63.670 of this chapter mean facilities in any of the industry
segments specified in Sec. 98.230 for the purposes of this paragraph
(n). Reporting requirements in Sec. 63.670(q) of this chapter mean
recordkeeping requirements for the purposes of this paragraph (n).
(ii) Tier 2. If you are required to monitor the flare as specified
in Sec. 60.5417b(d)(1)(viii) of this chapter, or you elect to
implement the flare monitoring requirements in Sec.
60.5417b(d)(1)(viii) of this chapter, then use a default combustion
efficiency of 95 percent. The exemptions from monitoring gas flow in
Sec. 60.5417b(d)(1)(viii)(D)(1) through (4) of this chapter do not
apply for the purposes of this paragraph (n).
(iii) Tier 3. If you do not monitor the flare as specified in
either paragraph (n)(4)(i) or (ii) of this section, then use a default
combustion efficiency of 92 percent.
(5) Calculate CH4 and CO2 emissions.
Calculate GHG volumetric emissions from flaring at standard conditions
using Equations W-19 and W-20 of this section and as specified in
paragraphs (n)(5)(i) through (iv) of this section.
[[Page 50399]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.026
Where:
Es,CH4 = Annual CH4 emissions from
flare stack in cubic feet, at standard conditions.
Es,CO2 = Annual CO2 emissions from
flare stack in cubic feet, at standard conditions.
Vs = Volume of gas sent to flare in standard cubic feet,
during the year as determined in paragraph (n)(1) of this section.
[eta] = Flare combustion efficiency, expressed as fraction of gas
combusted by a burning flare.
XCH4 = Annual average mole fraction of CH4 in
the feed gas to the flare or in each of the streams routed to the
flare as determined in paragraph (n)(3) of this section.
XCO2 = Annual average mole fraction of CO2 in
the feed gas to the flare or in each of the streams routed to the
flare as determined in paragraph (n)(3) of this section.
ZU = Fraction of the feed gas sent to an un-lit flare
determined from both the total time the flare was unlit as
determined by monitoring the pilot flame or combustion flame as
specified in paragraph (n)(2) of this section and the volume of gas
routed to the flare during periods when the flare was unlit as
determined by the flow measurement required by paragraph (n)(1) of
this section.
ZL = Fraction of the feed gas sent to a burning flare
(equal to 1-ZU).
Yj = Annual average mole fraction of hydrocarbon
constituents j (such as methane, ethane, propane, butane, and
pentanes-plus) in the feed gas to the flare or in each of the
streams routed to the flare as determined in paragraph (n)(3) of
this section.
Rj = Number of carbon atoms in the hydrocarbon
constituent j in the feed gas to the flare: 1 for methane, 2 for
ethane, 3 for propane, 4 for butane, and 5 for pentanes-plus).
(i) If you measure the gas flow at the flare inlet as specified in
paragraph (n)(1)(i) of this section and you measure gas composition for
the inlet gas to the flare as specified in paragraph (n)(3)(i) or (ii)
of this section, then use those data in Equations W-19 and W-20 to
calculate total emissions from the flare.
(ii) If you measure the flow from each source as specified in
paragraph (n)(1)(ii) of this section and you measure gas composition
for the inlet gas to the flare as specified in paragraph (n)(3)(i) or
(ii) of this section, then sum the flows for each stream to calculate
the total annual gas flow to the flare. Use that total annual flow with
the annual average concentration of each constituent as calculated in
paragraph (n)(3)(i) or (ii) of this section in Equations W-19 and W-20
to calculate total emissions from the flare.
(iii) If you measure the flow from each source as specified in
paragraph (n)(1)(ii) of this section and you measure gas composition
for the emission stream from each source as specified in paragraph
(n)(3)(iii) or (iv) of this section, then calculate total emissions
from the flare as specified in either paragraph (n)(5)(iii)(A) or (B)
of this section.
(A) Use each set of stream-specific flow and annual average
concentration data in Equations W-19 and W-20 to calculate stream-
specific flared emissions for each stream, and then sum the results
from each stream-specific calculation to calculate the total emissions
from the flare.
(B) Sum the flows from each source to calculate the total gas flow
into the flare and use the source-specific flows and source-specific
annual average concentrations to determine flow-weighted annual average
concentrations of CO2 and hydrocarbon constituents in the
combined gas stream into the flare. Use the calculated total gas flow
and the calculated flow-weighted annual average concentrations for the
inlet gas stream to the flare in Equations W-19 and W-20 to calculate
the total emissions from the flare.
(iv) You may not combine measurement of the inlet gas flow to the
flare as specified in paragraph (n)(1)(i) of this section with
measurement of the gas composition of the streams from each source as
specified in paragraph (n)(3)(iii) or (iv) of this section.
(6) Convert volume at actual conditions to volume at standard
conditions. Convert GHG volumetric emissions to standard conditions
using calculations in paragraph (t) of this section.
(7) Convert volumetric emissions to mass emissions. Calculate both
CH4 and CO2 mass emissions from volumetric
emissions using calculation in paragraph (v) of this section.
(8) Calculate N2O emissions. Calculate N2O emissions
from flare stacks using Equation W-40 in paragraph (z) of this section.
Determine higher heating values to use in Equation W-40 calculations as
specified in paragraphs (n)(8)(i) through (iii) of this section, as
applicable.
(i) If you measure composition of the inlet gas to the flare as
specified in either paragraph (n)(3)(i) or (ii) of this section, then
calculate a flare-specific higher heating value to use in Equation W-40
to calculate total N2O emissions from the flare.
(ii) If you measure composition of the individual streams routed to
the flare as specified in paragraph (n)(3)(iii) or (iv) of this
section, and you calculate CH4 and CO2 emissions
per stream as specified in paragraph (n)(5)(iii)(A) of this section,
then calculate stream-specific higher heating values. Use the stream-
specific higher heating values in separate stream-specific calculations
of N2O emissions and sum the resulting values to calculate
the total N2O emissions from the flare.
(iii) If you measure composition of the individual streams routed
to the flare as specified in paragraph (n)(3)(iii) or (iv) of this
section, and you calculate CH4 and CO2 emissions
using flow-weighted annual average concentrations for the inlet gas to
the flare as calculated according to paragraph (n)(5)(iii)(B) of this
section, then either calculate higher heating values and N2O
emissions as specified in paragraph (n)(8)(ii) of this section, or
calculate a flare-specific higher heating value using the calculated
flow-weighted composition of the inlet gas to the flare, and use this
flare-specific higher heating value to calculate the total
N2O emissions from the flare.
(9) CEMS. If you operate and maintain a CEMS that has both a
CO2 concentration monitor and volumetric flow rate monitor
for the combustion gases from the flare, you must calculate
CO2 emissions for the flare using the CEMS. You must follow
the Tier 4 Calculation Method and all associated calculation, quality
assurance, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements for Tier 4 in
subpart C of this part (General Stationary Fuel Combustion Sources). If
a CEMS is used to calculate flare stack CO2 emissions, you
must also comply with all other requirements specified in paragraphs
(n)(1) through (8) of this section, except that calculation of
CO2 emissions using
[[Page 50400]]
Equation W-20 in paragraph (n)(5) of this section is not required.
(10) Disaggregation. Using engineering calculations and best
available data, disaggregate the total emissions from the flare as
calculated in paragraphs (n)(7) and (8) of this section or paragraph
(n)(9) of this section, as applicable, to each source type listed in
paragraphs (n)(10)(i) through (viii) of this section, as applicable to
the industry segment, that routed emissions to the flare.
(i) Acid gas removal units.
(ii) Dehydrators.
(iii) Completions and workovers with hydraulic fracturing.
(iv) Completions and workovers without hydraulic fracturing.
(v) Hydrocarbon liquids and produced water storage tanks.
(vi) Well testing.
(vii) Associated gas.
(viii) Other (collectively).
(o) Centrifugal compressor venting. If you are required to report
emissions from centrifugal compressor venting as specified in Sec.
98.232(d)(2), (e)(2), (f)(2), (g)(2), and (h)(2), you must conduct
volumetric emission measurements specified in paragraph (o)(1) of this
section using methods specified in paragraphs (o)(2) through (5) of
this section; perform calculations specified in paragraphs (o)(6)
through (9) of this section; and calculate CH4 and
CO2 mass emissions as specified in paragraph (o)(11) of this
section. If you are required to report emissions from centrifugal
compressor venting at an onshore petroleum and natural gas production
facility as specified in Sec. 98.232(c)(19) or an onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting facility as specified in Sec.
98.232(j)(8), you must calculate volumetric emissions as specified in
paragraph (o)(10) of this section and calculate CH4 and
CO2 mass emissions as specified in paragraph (o)(11) of this
section. If emissions from a compressor source are routed to a flare,
paragraphs (o)(1) through (11) of this section do not apply and instead
you must calculate CH4, CO2, and N2O
emissions as specified in paragraph (n) of this section. If emissions
from a compressor source are routed to combustion, paragraphs (o)(1)
through (11) of this section do not apply and instead you must
calculate and report emissions as specified in subpart C of this part
or paragraph (z) of this section, as applicable. If emissions from a
compressor source are routed to a vapor recovery system, paragraphs
(o)(1) through (11) of this section do not apply.
(1) * * *
(i) Centrifugal compressor source as found measurements. Measure
venting from each compressor according to either paragraph
(o)(1)(i)(A), (B), or (C) of this section at least once annually, based
on the compressor mode (as defined in Sec. 98.238) in which the
compressor was found at the time of measurement, except as specified in
paragraph (o)(1)(i)(D) of this section. If additional measurements
beyond the required annual testing are performed (including duplicate
measurements or measurement of additional operating modes), then all
measurements satisfying the applicable monitoring and QA/QC that is
required by this paragraph (o) must be used in the calculations
specified in this section.
(A) For a compressor measured in operating-mode, you must measure
volumetric emissions from blowdown valve leakage through the blowdown
vent as specified in paragraph (o)(2)(i) of this section, measure
volumetric emissions from wet seal oil degassing vents as specified in
paragraph (o)(2)(ii) of this section if the compressor has wet seal oil
degassing vents, and measure volumetric emissions from dry seal vents
as specified in paragraph (o)(2)(iii) of this section if the compressor
has dry seals.
(B) For a compressor measured in not-operating-depressurized-mode,
you must measure volumetric emissions from isolation valve leakage as
specified in paragraph (o)(2)(i) of this section. If a compressor is
not operated and has blind flanges in place throughout the reporting
period, measurement is not required in this compressor mode.
(C) For a compressor measured in standby-pressurized-mode, you must
measure volumetric emissions from blowdown valve leakage through the
blowdown vent as specified in paragraph (o)(2)(i) of this section,
measure volumetric emissions from wet seal oil degassing vents as
specified in paragraph (o)(2)(ii) of this section if the compressor has
wet seal oil degassing vents, and measure volumetric emissions from dry
seal vents as specified in paragraph (o)(2)(iii) of this section if the
compressor has dry seals.
* * * * *
(2) Methods for performing as found measurements from individual
centrifugal compressor sources. If conducting measurements for each
compressor source, you must determine the volumetric emissions from
blowdown valves and isolation valves as specified in paragraph
(o)(2)(i) of this section, the volumetric emissions from wet seal oil
degassing vents as specified in paragraph (o)(2)(ii) of this section,
and the volumetric emissions from dry seal vents as specified in
paragraph (o)(2)(iii) of this section.
(i) For blowdown valves on compressors in operating-mode or in
standby-pressurized-mode and for isolation valves on compressors in
not-operating-depressurized-mode, determine the volumetric emissions
using one of the methods specified in paragraphs (o)(2)(i)(A) through
(D) of this section.
* * * * *
(ii) For wet seal oil degassing vents in operating-mode or in
standby-pressurized-mode, determine volumetric flow at standard
conditions, using one of the methods specified in paragraphs
(o)(2)(ii)(A) through (C) of this section. You must quantitatively
measure the volumetric flow for wet seal oil degassing vent; you may
not use screening methods set forth in Sec. 98.234(a) to screen for
emissions for the wet seal oil degassing vent.
(A) Use a temporary meter such as a vane anemometer or permanent
flow meter according to methods set forth in Sec. 98.234(b).
(B) Use calibrated bags according to methods set forth in Sec.
98.234(c).
(C) Use a high volume sampler according to methods set forth in
Sec. 98.234(d).
(iii) For dry seal vents in operating-mode or in standby-
pressurized-mode, determine volumetric flow at standard conditions from
each dry seal vent using one of the methods specified in paragraphs
(o)(2)(iii)(A) through (D) of this section. If a compressor has more
than one dry seal vent, determine the aggregate dry seal vent
volumetric flow for the compressor as the sum of the volumetric flows
determined for each dry seal vent on the compressor.
(A) Use a temporary meter such as a vane anemometer or permanent
flow meter according to methods set forth in Sec. 98.234(b).
(B) Use calibrated bags according to methods set forth in Sec.
98.234(c).
(C) Use a high volume sampler according to methods set forth in
Sec. 98.234(d).
(D) You may choose to use any of the methods set forth in Sec.
98.234(a)(1) through (3) to screen for emissions. If emissions are
detected using one of these specified methods, then you must use one of
the methods specified in paragraph (o)(2)(iii)(A) through (C) of this
section. If emissions are not detected using the methods in Sec.
98.234(a)(1) through (3), then you may assume that the volumetric
emissions are zero. For the purposes of this paragraph, when using any
of the
[[Page 50401]]
methods in Sec. 98.234(a), emissions are detected whenever a leak is
detected according to the methods. Acoustic leak detection is only
applicable for through-valve leakage and is not applicable for
screening dry seal vents.
(4) * * *
(ii) * * *
(E) You may choose to use any of the methods set forth in Sec.
98.234(a)(1) through (3) to screen for emissions. If emissions are
detected using one of these methods, then you must use one of the
methods specified in paragraph (o)(4)(ii)(A) through (D) of this
section. If emissions are not detected using the methods in Sec.
98.234(a)(1) through (3), then you may assume that the volumetric
emissions are zero. For the purposes of this paragraph, when using any
of the methods in Sec. 98.234(a), emissions are detected whenever a
leak is detected according to the method. Acoustic leak detection is
only applicable for through-valve leakage and is not applicable for
screening a manifolded group of compressor sources.
* * * * *
(6) * * *
(i) Using Equation W-21 of this section, calculate the annual
volumetric GHG emissions for each centrifugal compressor mode-source
combination specified in paragraphs (o)(1)(i)(A) through (C) of this
section that was measured during the reporting year.
* * * * *
m = Compressor mode-source combination specified in paragraph
(o)(1)(i)(A), (B), or (C) of this section that was measured for the
reporting year.
(ii) Using Equation W-22 of this section, calculate the annual
volumetric GHG emissions from each centrifugal compressor mode-source
combination specified in paragraphs (o)(1)(i)(A) through (C) of this
section that was not measured during the reporting year.
* * * * *
m = Compressor mode-source combination specified in paragraph
(o)(1)(i)(A), (B), or (C) of this section that was not measured in the
reporting year.
(iii) Using Equation W-23 of this section, develop an emission
factor for each compressor mode-source combination specified in
paragraphs (o)(1)(i)(A) through (C) of this section. These emission
factors must be calculated annually and used in Equation W-22 of this
section to determine volumetric emissions from a centrifugal compressor
in the mode-source combinations that were not measured in the reporting
year.
* * * * *
m = Compressor mode-source combination specified in paragraph
(o)(1)(i)(A), (B), or (C) of this section.
* * * * *
(8) * * *
Tg = Total time the manifolded group of compressor sources g
had potential for emissions in the reporting year, in hours. Include
all time during which at least one compressor source in the manifolded
group of compressor sources g was in a mode-source combination
specified in either paragraph (o)(1)(i)(A), (o)(1)(i)(B), (o)(1)(i)(C),
(p)(1)(i)(A), (p)(1)(i)(B), or (p)(1)(i)(C) of this section. Default of
8760 hours may be used.
* * * * *
(10) Method for calculating volumetric GHG emissions from wet seal
oil degassing vents at an onshore petroleum and natural gas production
facility or an onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
facility. You must calculate volumetric emissions from centrifugal
compressors at an onshore petroleum and natural gas production facility
or an onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting facility
as specified in paragraphs (o)(10)(i) through (iii), as applicable.
(i) For centrifugal compressors at an onshore petroleum and natural
gas production facility or an onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facility that are subject to the centrifugal
compressor standards in Sec. 60.5380b of this chapter or an applicable
approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in part 62 of this
chapter for dry seals and self-contained wet seals, you must conduct
measurements according to paragraphs (o)(10)(i)(A) and (B) of this
section.
(A) You must conduct the volumetric emission measurements as
required by Sec. 60.5380b(a)(5) of this chapter or an applicable
approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in part 62 of this
chapter, conduct any additional volumetric emission measurements
specified in paragraph (o)(1) of this section using methods specified
in paragraphs (o)(2) through (5) of this section, and calculate
emissions as specified in paragraphs (o)(6) through (9) of this
section. Conduct all measurements required by this paragraph
(o)(10)(i)(A) at the frequency specified by Sec. 60.5380b(a)(4) of
this chapter or an applicable approved state plan or applicable Federal
plan in part 62 of this chapter. For any reporting year in which
measuring at the frequency specified by Sec. 60.5380b(a)(4) of this
chapter results in measurement not being required for a subject
compressor, calculate emissions for all mode-source combinations as
specified in paragraph (o)(6)(ii) of this section.
(B) You must conduct measurements of compressors as specified in
paragraph (o)(1)(i)(B) of this section such that at the end of each
calendar year, you have taken measurements in not-operating-
depressurized-mode over the last 3 consecutive calendar years for at
least one-third of the compressors at your facility that are subject to
the centrifugal compressor standards in Sec. 60.5380b of this chapter
or an applicable approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in part
62 of this chapter for dry seals and self-contained wet seals.
(ii) For centrifugal compressors at an onshore petroleum and
natural gas production facility or an onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facility that are not subject to the centrifugal
compressor standards in Sec. 60.5380b of this chapter or an applicable
approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in part 62 of this
chapter for dry seals and self-contained wet seals, you may elect to
conduct the volumetric emission measurements specified in paragraph
(o)(1) of this section using methods specified in paragraphs (o)(2)
through (5) of this section and perform calculations specified in
paragraphs (o)(6) through (9) of this section.
(iii) For any centrifugal compressors at an onshore petroleum and
natural gas production facility or an onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facility for which paragraphs (o)(10)(i) and
(ii) of this section do not apply, you must calculate atmospheric
centrifugal compressor wet seal oil degassing vents at an onshore
petroleum and natural gas production facility or an onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting facility using Equation W-25 of
this section. Emissions from centrifugal compressor wet seal oil
degassing vents that are routed to a flare, combustion, or vapor
recovery system are not required to be determined under this paragraph
(o).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.027
Where:
Es,i = Annual volumetric GHGi (either
CH4 or CO2) emissions from centrifugal
compressor wet seals, at standard conditions, in cubic feet.
Count = Total number of centrifugal compressors that have wet seal
oil
[[Page 50402]]
degassing vents that are vented directly to the atmosphere.
EFi,s = Emission factor for GHGi. Use 1.2 x
107 standard cubic feet per year per compressor for
CH4 and 5.30 x 105 standard cubic feet per
year per compressor for CO2 at 60 [deg]F and 14.7 psia.
* * * * *
(p) Reciprocating compressor venting. If you are required to report
emissions from reciprocating compressor venting as specified in Sec.
98.232(d)(1), (e)(1), (f)(1), (g)(1), and (h)(1), you must conduct
volumetric emission measurements specified in paragraph (p)(1) of this
section using methods specified in paragraphs (p)(2) through (5) of
this section; perform calculations specified in paragraphs (p)(6)
through (9) of this section; and calculate CH4 and
CO2 mass emissions as specified in paragraph (p)(11) of this
section. If you are required to report emissions from reciprocating
compressor venting at an onshore petroleum and natural gas production
facility as specified in Sec. 98.232(c)(11) or an onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting facility as specified in Sec.
98.232(j)(9), you must calculate volumetric emissions as specified in
paragraph (p)(10) of this section and calculate CH4 and
CO2 mass emissions as specified in paragraph (p)(11) of this
section. If emissions from a compressor source are routed to a flare,
paragraphs (p)(1) through (11) of this section do not apply and instead
you must calculate CH4, CO2, and N2O
emissions as specified in paragraph (n) of this section. If emissions
from a compressor source are routed to combustion, paragraphs (p)(1)
through (11) of this section do not apply and instead you must
calculate and report emissions as specified in subpart C of this part
or paragraph (z) of this section, as applicable. If emissions from a
compressor source are routed to a vapor recovery system, paragraphs
(p)(1) through (11) of this section do not apply.
(1) * * *
(i) Reciprocating compressor source as found measurements. Measure
venting from each compressor according to either paragraph
(p)(1)(i)(A), (B), or (C) of this section at least once annually, based
on the compressor mode (as defined in Sec. 98.238) in which the
compressor was found at the time of measurement, except as specified in
paragraph (p)(1)(i)(D) of this section. If additional measurements
beyond the required annual testing are performed (including duplicate
measurements or measurement of additional operating modes), then all
measurements satisfying the applicable monitoring and QA/QC that is
required by this paragraph (p) must be used in the calculations
specified in this section.
(A) For a compressor measured in operating-mode, you must measure
volumetric emissions from blowdown valve leakage through the blowdown
vent as specified in paragraph (p)(2)(i) of this section, and measure
volumetric emissions from reciprocating rod packing as specified in
paragraph (p)(2)(ii) or (iii) of this section, as applicable.
(B) For a compressor measured in not-operating-depressurized-mode,
you must measure volumetric emissions from isolation valve leakage as
specified in paragraph (p)(2)(i) of this section. If a compressor is
not operated and has blind flanges in place throughout the reporting
period, measurement is not required in this compressor mode.
(C) For a compressor measured in standby-pressurized-mode, you must
measure volumetric emissions from blowdown valve leakage through the
blowdown vent as specified in paragraph (p)(2)(i) of this section and
measure volumetric emissions from reciprocating rod packing as
specified in paragraph (p)(2)(ii) or (iii) of this section, as
applicable.
(D) An annual as found measurement is not required in the first
year of operation for any new compressor that begins operation after as
found measurements have been conducted for all existing compressors.
For only the first year of operation of new compressors, calculate
emissions according to paragraph (p)(6)(ii) of this section.
* * * * *
(2) Methods for performing as found measurements from individual
reciprocating compressor sources. If conducting measurements for each
compressor source, you must determine the volumetric emissions from
blowdown valves and isolation valves as specified in paragraph
(p)(2)(i) of this section. You must determine the volumetric emissions
from reciprocating rod packing as specified in paragraph (p)(2)(ii) or
(iii) of this section, as applicable.
* * * * *
(ii) For reciprocating rod packing equipped with an open-ended vent
line on compressors in operating-mode or standby-pressurized-mode,
determine the volumetric emissions using one of the methods specified
in paragraphs (p)(2)(ii)(A) through (C) of this section.
* * * * *
(C) You may choose to use any of the methods set forth in Sec.
98.234(a)(1) through (3) to screen for emissions. If emissions are
detected using one of these specified methods, then you must use one of
the methods specified in paragraphs (p)(2)(ii)(A) and (B) of this
section. If emissions are not detected using the methods in Sec.
98.234(a)(1) through (3), then you may assume that the volumetric
emissions are zero. For the purposes of this paragraph (p)(2)(ii)(C),
when using any of the methods in Sec. 98.234(a), emissions are
detected whenever a leak is detected according to the method. Acoustic
leak detection is only applicable for through-valve leakage and is not
applicable for screening or measuring rod packing emissions.
(iii) * * *
(A) You must use the methods described in Sec. 98.234(a)(1)
through (3) to conduct annual leak detection of equipment leaks from
the packing case into an open distance piece, or for compressors with a
closed distance piece, conduct annual detection of gas emissions from
the rod packing vent, distance piece vent, compressor crank case
breather cap, or other vent emitting gas from the rod packing. Acoustic
leak detection is only applicable for through-valve leakage and is not
applicable for screening rod packing emissions.
* * * * *
(4) * * *
(ii) * * *
(C) A high volume sampler according to methods set forth in Sec.
98.234(d).
* * * * *
(E) You may choose to use any of the methods set forth in Sec.
98.234(a)(1) through (3) to screen for emissions. If emissions are
detected using one of these specified methods, then you must use one of
the methods specified in paragraphs (p)(4)(ii)(A) through (D) of this
section. If emissions are not detected using the methods in Sec.
98.234(a)(1) through (3), then you may assume that the volumetric
emissions are zero. For the purposes of this paragraph, when using any
of the methods in Sec. 98.234(a), emissions are detected whenever a
leak is detected according to the method. Acoustic leak detection is
only applicable for through-valve leakage and is not applicable for
screening a manifolded group of compressor sources.
* * * * *
(6) * * *
(ii) Using Equation W-27 of this section, calculate the annual
volumetric GHG emissions from each reciprocating compressor mode-source
combination specified in paragraphs (p)(1)(i)(A) through (C) of this
section that was not measured during the reporting year.
* * * * *
[[Page 50403]]
(iii) Using Equation W-28 of this section, develop an emission
factor for each compressor mode-source combination specified in
paragraphs (p)(1)(i)(A) through (C) of this section. These emission
factors must be calculated annually and used in Equation W-27 of this
section to determine volumetric emissions from a reciprocating
compressor in the mode-source combinations that were not measured in
the reporting year.
* * * * *
(8) * * *
Tg = Total time the manifolded group of compressor sources g
had potential for emissions in the reporting year, in hours. Include
all time during which at least one compressor source in the manifolded
group of compressor sources g was in a mode-source combination
specified in either paragraph (o)(1)(i)(A), (o)(1)(i)(B), (o)(1)(i)(C),
(p)(1)(i)(A), (p)(1)(i)(B), or (p)(1)(i)(C) of this section. Default of
8760 hours may be used.
* * * * *
(10) Method for calculating volumetric GHG emissions from
reciprocating compressor venting at an onshore petroleum and natural
gas production facility or an onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facility. You must calculate volumetric
emissions from reciprocating compressors at an onshore petroleum and
natural gas production facility or an onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facility as specified in paragraphs (p)(10)(i)
through (iii) of this section, as applicable.
(i) For reciprocating compressors at an onshore petroleum and
natural gas production facility or an onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facility that are subject to the reciprocating
compressor standards in Sec. 60.5385b of this chapter or an applicable
approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in part 62 of this
chapter, you must conduct measurements according to paragraphs
(p)(10)(i)(A) and (B) of this section.
(A) You must conduct the volumetric emission measurements as
required by Sec. 60.5385b(b) and (c) of this chapter or an applicable
approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in part 62 of this
chapter, conduct any additional volumetric emission measurements
specified in paragraph (p)(1) of this section using methods specified
in paragraphs (p)(2) through (5) of this section, and calculate
emissions as specified in paragraphs (p)(6) through (9) of this
section. Conduct all measurements required by this paragraph
(p)(10)(i)(A) at the frequency specified by Sec. 60.5385b(a) of this
chapter or an applicable approved state plan or applicable Federal plan
in part 62 of this chapter. For any reporting year in which measuring
at the frequency specified by Sec. 60.5385b(a) of this chapter results
in measurement not being required for a subject compressor, calculate
emissions for all mode-source combinations as specified in paragraph
(p)(6)(ii) of this section.
(B) You must conduct measurements of compressors as specified in
paragraph (p)(1)(i)(B) of this section such that at the end of each
calendar year, you have taken measurements in not-operating-
depressurized-mode over the last 3 consecutive calendar years for at
least one-third of the compressors at your facility that are subject to
the reciprocating compressor standards in Sec. 60.5385b of this
chapter or an applicable approved state plan or applicable Federal plan
in part 62 of this chapter.
(ii) For reciprocating compressors at an onshore petroleum and
natural gas production facility or an onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facility that are not subject to the
reciprocating compressor standards in Sec. 60.5385b of this chapter or
an applicable approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in part 62
of this chapter, you may elect to conduct volumetric emission
measurements specified in paragraph (p)(1) of this section using
methods specified in paragraphs (p)(2) through (5) of this section and
perform calculations specified in paragraphs (p)(6) through (9) of this
section.
(iii) For any reciprocating compressors at an onshore petroleum and
natural gas production facility or an onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facility for which paragraphs (p)(10)(i) and
(ii) of this section do not apply, you must calculate reciprocating
compressor atmospheric venting of rod packing emissions using Equation
W-29D of this section. Reciprocating compressor rod packing emissions
that are routed to a flare, combustion, or vapor recovery system are
not required to be determined under this paragraph (p).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.028
Where:
Es,i = Annual volumetric GHGi (either
CH4 or CO2) emissions from reciprocating
compressors, at standard conditions, in cubic feet.
Count = Total number of reciprocating compressors with rod packing
emissions vented directly to the atmosphere.
EFi,s = Emission factor for GHGi. Use 2.13 x
105 standard cubic feet per year per compressor for
CH4 and 1.18 x 104 standard cubic feet per
year per compressor for CO2 at 60 [deg]F and 14.7 psia.
* * * * *
(q) Equipment leak surveys. For the components identified in
paragraphs (q)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section, you must conduct
equipment leak surveys using the leak detection methods specified in
paragraphs (q)(1)(i) through (iii) and (v) of this section. For the
components identified in paragraph (q)(1)(iv) of this section, you may
elect to conduct equipment leak surveys, and if you elect to conduct
surveys, you must use a leak detection method specified in paragraph
(q)(1)(iv) of this section. This paragraph (q) applies to components in
streams with gas content greater than 10 percent CH4 plus
CO2 by weight. Components in streams with gas content less
than or equal to 10 percent CH4 plus CO2 by
weight are exempt from the requirements of this paragraph (q) and do
not need to be reported. Tubing systems equal to or less than one half
inch diameter are exempt from the requirements of this paragraph (q)
and do not need to be reported. Equipment leak components in vacuum
service are exempt from the survey and emission estimation requirements
of this paragraph (q) and only the count of these equipment must be
reported.
(1) Survey requirements--(i) For the components listed in Sec.
98.232(e)(7), (f)(5), (g)(4), and (h)(5), that are not subject to the
well site or compressor station fugitive emissions standards in Sec.
60.5397a of this chapter, the fugitive emissions standards for well
sites, centralized production facilities, and compressor stations in
Sec. 60.5397b of this chapter, or an applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of this chapter, you must conduct
surveys using any of the leak detection methods listed in Sec.
98.234(a) and calculate equipment leak emissions using the procedures
specified in either paragraph (q)(2) or (3) of this section.
(ii) For the components listed in Sec. 98.232(i)(1), you must
conduct surveys using any of the leak detection methods listed in Sec.
98.234(a) except Sec. 98.234(a)(2)(ii) and calculate equipment leak
emissions using the procedures specified in either paragraph (q)(2) or
(3) of this section.
(iii) For the components listed in Sec. 98.232(c)(21)(i), (e)(7)
and (8), (f)(5) through (8), (g)(4), (g)(6) and (7), (h)(5), (h)(7) and
(8), and (j)(10)(i) that are
[[Page 50404]]
subject to the well site or compressor station fugitive emissions
standards in Sec. 60.5397a of this chapter, the fugitive emissions
standards for well sites, centralized production facilities, and
compressor stations in Sec. 60.5397b of this chapter, or an applicable
approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in part 62 of this
chapter, you must conduct surveys using any of the leak detection
methods in Sec. 98.234(a)(1)(ii) or (iii) or (a)(2)(ii), as
applicable, and calculate equipment leak emissions using the procedures
specified in either paragraph (q)(2) or (3) of this section.
(iv) For the components listed in Sec. 98.232(c)(21)(i), (e)(8),
(f)(6) through (8), (g)(6) or (7), (h)(7) or (8), or (j)(10)(i), that
are not subject to fugitive emissions standards in Sec. 60.5397a of
this chapter, the fugitive emissions standards for well sites,
centralized production facilities, and compressor stations in Sec.
60.5397b of this chapter, or an applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of this chapter, you may elect to
conduct surveys according to this paragraph (q), and, if you elect to
do so, then you must use one of the leak detection methods in Sec.
98.234(a).
(A) If you elect to use a leak detection method in Sec. 98.234(a)
for the surveyed component types in Sec. 98.232(c)(21)(i), (f)(7),
(g)(6), (h)(7), or (j)(10)(i) in lieu of the population count
methodology specified in paragraph (r) of this section, then you must
calculate emissions for the surveyed component types in Sec.
98.232(c)(21)(i), (f)(7), (g)(6), (h)(7), or (j)(10)(i) using the
procedures in either paragraph (q)(2) or (3) of this section.
(B) If you elect to use a leak detection method in Sec. 98.234(a)
for the surveyed component types in Sec. 98.232(e)(8), (f)(6) and (8),
(g)(7), and (h)(8), then you must use the procedures in either
paragraph (q)(2) or (3) of this section to calculate those emissions.
(C) If you elect to use a leak detection method in Sec.
98.234(a)(1)(ii) or (iii) or (a)(2)(ii), as applicable, for any
elective survey under paragraph (q)(1)(iv) of this section, then you
must survey the component types in Sec. 98.232(c)(21)(i), (e)(8),
(f)(6) through (8), (g)(6) and (7), (h)(7) and (8), and (j)(10)(i) that
are not subject to fugitive emissions standards in Sec. 60.5397a of
this chapter, the fugitive emissions standards for well sites,
centralized production facilities, and compressor stations in Sec.
60.5397b of this chapter, or an applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of this chapter, and you must
calculate emissions from the surveyed component types in Sec.
98.232(c)(21)(i), (e)(8), (f)(6) through (8), (g)(6) and (7), (h)(7)
and (8), and (j)(10)(i) using the emission calculation requirements in
either paragraph (q)(2) or (3) of this section.
(v) For the components listed in Sec. 98.232(d)(7), you must
conduct surveys as specified in paragraphs (q)(1)(v)(A) and (B) of this
section and you must calculate equipment leak emissions using the
procedures specified in either paragraph (q)(2) or (3) of this section.
(A) For the components listed in Sec. 98.232(d)(7) that are not
subject to the equipment leak standards for onshore natural gas
processing plants in Sec. 60.5400b of this chapter, or an applicable
approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in part 62 of this
chapter, you may use any of the leak detection methods listed in Sec.
98.234(a).
(B) For the components listed in Sec. 98.232(d)(7) that are
subject to the equipment leak standards for onshore natural gas
processing plants in Sec. 60.5400b of this chapter, or an applicable
approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in part 62 of this
chapter, you must use either of the leak detection methods in Sec.
98.234(a)(1)(iii) or (a)(2)(ii).
(vi) Except as provided in paragraph (q)(1)(vii) of this section,
you must conduct at least one complete leak detection survey in a
calendar year. If you conduct multiple complete leak detection surveys
in a calendar year, you must use the results from each complete leak
detection survey when calculating emissions using the procedures
specified in either paragraph (q)(2) or (3) of this section. Except as
provided in paragraphs (q)(1)(vi)(A) through (G) of this section, a
complete leak detection survey is a survey in which all equipment
components required to be surveyed as specified in paragraphs (q)(1)(i)
through (v) of this section are surveyed.
(A) For components subject to the well site and compressor station
fugitive emissions standards in Sec. 60.5397a of this chapter, each
survey conducted in accordance with Sec. 60.5397a of this chapter
using one of the methods in Sec. 98.234(a) will be considered a
complete leak detection survey for purposes of this section.
(B) For components subject to the well site, centralized production
facility, and compressor station fugitive emissions standards in Sec.
60.5397b of this chapter, each survey conducted in accordance with the
fugitive emissions standards for well sites, centralized production
facilities, and compressor stations in Sec. 60.5397b of this chapter
using one of the methods in Sec. 98.234(a) will be considered a
complete leak detection survey for purposes of this section.
(C) For components subject to the well site, centralized production
facility, and compressor station fugitive emissions standards in an
applicable approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in part 62 of
this chapter, each survey conducted in accordance with the applicable
approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in part 62 of this
chapter using one of the methods in Sec. 98.234(a) will be considered
a complete leak detection survey for purposes of this section.
(D) For an onshore petroleum and natural gas production facility
electing to conduct leak detection surveys according to paragraph
(q)(1)(iv) of this section, a survey of all required components at a
single well-pad will be considered a complete leak detection survey for
purposes of this section.
(E) For an onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
facility electing to conduct leak detection surveys according to
paragraph (q)(1)(iv) of this section, a survey of all required
components at a gathering and boosting site, as defined in Sec.
98.238, will be considered a complete leak detection survey for
purposes of this section.
(F) For an onshore natural gas processing facility subject to the
equipment leak standards for onshore natural gas processing plants in
Sec. 60.5400b of this chapter or an applicable approved state plan or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of this chapter, each survey
conducted in accordance with the equipment leak standards for onshore
natural gas processing plants in Sec. 60.5400b of this chapter or an
applicable approved state plan or applicable Federal plan in part 62 of
this chapter will be considered a complete leak detection survey for
the purposes of calculating emissions using the procedures specified in
either paragraph (q)(2) or (3) of this section. At least one complete
leak detection survey conducted during the reporting year must include
all components listed in Sec. 98.232(d)(7) and subject to this
paragraph (q), including components which are considered inaccessible
emission sources as defined in part 60 of this chapter.
(G) For natural gas distribution facilities that choose to conduct
equipment leak surveys at all above grade transmission-distribution
transfer stations over multiple years as provided in paragraph
(q)(1)(vii) of this section, a survey of all required components at the
above grade transmission-distribution transfer stations monitored
during the calendar year will be considered a
[[Page 50405]]
complete leak detection survey for purposes of this section.
(vii) Natural gas distribution facilities are required to perform
equipment leak surveys only at above grade stations that qualify as
transmission-distribution transfer stations. Below grade transmission-
distribution transfer stations and all metering-regulating stations
that do not meet the definition of transmission-distribution transfer
stations are not required to perform equipment leak surveys under this
section. Natural gas distribution facilities may choose to conduct
equipment leak surveys at all above grade transmission-distribution
transfer stations over multiple years ``n,'' not exceeding a five-year
period to cover all above grade transmission-distribution transfer
stations. If the facility chooses to use the multiple year option, then
the number of transmission-distribution transfer stations that are
monitored in each year should be approximately equal across all years
in the cycle.
(2) Calculation Method 1: Leaker emission factor calculation
methodology. If you elect not to measure leaks according to Calculation
Method 2 as specified in paragraph (q)(3) of this section, you must use
this Calculation Method 1 for all components included in a complete
leak survey. For industry segments listed in Sec. 98.230(a)(2) through
(9), if equipment leaks are detected during surveys required or elected
for components listed in paragraphs (q)(1)(i) through (v) of this
section, then you must calculate equipment leak emissions per component
type per reporting facility using Equation W-30 of this section and the
requirements specified in paragraphs (q)(2)(i) through (ix) of this
section. For the industry segment listed in Sec. 98.230(a)(8), the
results from Equation W-30 are used to calculate population emission
factors on a meter/regulator run basis using Equation W-31 of this
section. If you chose to conduct equipment leak surveys at all above
grade transmission-distribution transfer stations over multiple years,
``n,'' according to paragraph (q)(1)(vii) of this section, then you
must calculate the emissions from all above grade transmission-
distribution transfer stations as specified in paragraph (q)(2)(xi) of
this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.029
Where:
Es,p,i = Annual total volumetric emissions of GHGi from
specific component type ``p'' (in accordance with paragraphs
(q)(1)(i) through (v) of this section) in standard (``s'') cubic
feet, as specified in paragraphs (q)(2)(ii) through (x) of this
section.
xp = Total number of specific component type ``p''
detected as leaking in any leak survey during the year. A component
found leaking in two or more surveys during the year is counted as
one leaking component.
EFs,p = Leaker emission factor as specified in paragraphs
(q)(2)(iii) through (x) of this section.
k = Factor to adjust for undetected leaks by respective leak
detection method, where k equals 1.25 for the methods in Sec.
98.234(q)(1), (3) and (5); k equals 1.55 for the method in Sec.
98.234(q)(2)(i); and k equals 1.27 for the method in Sec.
98.234(q)(2)(ii).
GHGi = For onshore petroleum and natural gas production
facilities and onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities, concentration of GHGi,
CH4, or CO2, in produced natural gas as
defined in paragraph (u)(2) of this section; for onshore natural gas
processing facilities, concentration of GHGi,
CH4 or CO2, in the total hydrocarbon of the
feed natural gas; for onshore natural gas transmission compression
and underground natural gas storage, GHGi equals 0.975
for CH4 and 1.1 x 10-\2\ for CO2;
for LNG storage and LNG import and export equipment, GHGi
equals 1 for CH4 and 0 for CO2; and for
natural gas distribution, GHGi equals 1 for CH4 and 1.1 x
10-\2\ CO2.
Tp,z = The total time the surveyed component ``z,''
component type ``p,'' was assumed to be leaking and operational, in
hours. If one leak detection survey is conducted in the calendar
year, assume the component was leaking for the entire calendar year.
If multiple leak detection surveys are conducted in the calendar
year, assume a component found leaking in the first survey was
leaking since the beginning of the year until the date of the
survey; assume a component found leaking in the last survey of the
year was leaking from the preceding survey through the end of the
year; assume a component found leaking in a survey between the first
and last surveys of the year was leaking since the preceding survey
until the date of the survey; and sum times for all leaking periods.
For each leaking component, account for time the component was not
operational (i.e., not operating under pressure) using an
engineering estimate based on best available data.
(i) The leak detection surveys selected for use in Equation W-30
must be conducted during the calendar year as indicated in paragraph
(q)(1)(vi) and (vii) of this section, as applicable.
* * * * *
(iii) Onshore petroleum and natural gas production facilities must,
if available, use the site-specific leaker emission factor calculated
in accordance with paragraph (q)(4) of section or use the appropriate
default whole gas leaker emission factors consistent with the well
type, where components associated with gas wells are considered to be
in gas service and components associated with oil wells are considered
to be in oil service as listed in Table W-2 to this subpart.
(iv) Onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities must, if available, use the site-specific leaker emission
factor calculated in accordance with paragraph (q)(4) of section or use
the appropriate default whole gas leaker factors for components in gas
service listed in Table W-2 to this subpart.
(v) Onshore natural gas processing facilities must, if available,
use the site-specific leaker emission factor calculated in accordance
with paragraph (q)(4) of section or use the appropriate default total
hydrocarbon leaker emission factors for compressor components in gas
service and non-compressor components in gas service listed in table W-
4 to this subpart.
(vi) Onshore natural gas transmission compression facilities must,
if available, use the site-specific leaker emission factor calculated
in accordance with paragraph (q)(4) of section or use the appropriate
default total hydrocarbon leaker emission factors for compressor
components in gas service and non-compressor components in gas service
listed in table W-4 to this subpart.
(vii) Underground natural gas storage facilities must, if
available, use the site-specific leaker emission factor calculated in
accordance with paragraph (q)(4) of section or use the appropriate
default total hydrocarbon leaker emission factors for storage stations
or storage wellheads in gas service listed in table W-4 to this
subpart.
(viii) LNG storage facilities must, if available, use the site-
specific leaker emission factor calculated in accordance with paragraph
(q)(4) of section or use the appropriate default methane leaker
[[Page 50406]]
emission factors for LNG storage components in LNG service or gas
service listed in table W-6 to this subpart.
(ix) LNG import and export facilities must, if available, use the
site-specific leaker emission factor calculated in accordance with
paragraph (q)(4) of section or use the appropriate default methane
leaker emission factors for LNG terminals components in LNG service or
gas service listed in table W-6 to this subpart.
(x) Natural gas distribution facilities must use Equation W-30 of
this section and the default methane leaker emission factors for
transmission-distribution transfer station components in gas service
listed in table W-6 to this subpart to calculate component emissions
from annual equipment leak surveys conducted at above grade
transmission-distribution transfer stations.
(A) Use Equation W-31 of this section to determine the meter/
regulator run population emission factors for each GHGi. As additional
survey data become available, you must recalculate the meter/regulator
run population emission factors for each GHGi annually according to
paragraph (q)(2)(x)(B) of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.030
Where:
EFs,MR,i = Meter/regulator run population emission factor
for GHGi based on all surveyed above grade transmission-
distribution transfer stations over ``n'' years, in standard cubic
feet of GHGi per operational hour of all meter/regulator
runs.
Es,p,i,y = Annual total volumetric emissions at standard
conditions of GHGi from component type ``p'' during year
``y'' in standard (``s'') cubic feet, as calculated using Equation
W-30 of this section.
p = Seven component types listed in Table W-6 to this subpart for
transmission-distribution transfer stations.
Tw,y = The total time the surveyed meter/regulator run
``w'' was operational, in hours during survey year ``y'' using an
engineering estimate based on best available data.
CountMR,y = Count of meter/regulator runs surveyed at
above grade transmission-distribution transfer stations in year
``y''.
y = Year of data included in emission factor ``EFs,MR,i''
according to paragraph (q)(2)(x)(B) of this section.
n = Number of years of data, according to paragraph (q)(1)(vii) of
this section, whose results are used to calculate emission factor
``EFs,MR,i'' according to paragraph (q)(2)(x)(B) of this
section.
(B) The emission factor ``eFs,MR,i,'' based on annual
equipment leak surveys at above grade transmission-distribution
transfer stations, must be calculated annually. If you chose to conduct
equipment leak surveys at all above grade transmission-distribution
transfer stations over multiple years, ``n,'' according to paragraph
(q)(1)(vii) of this section and you have submitted a smaller number of
annual reports than the duration of the selected cycle period of 5
years or less, then all available data from the current year and
previous years must be used in the calculation of the emission factor
``EFs,MR,i'' from Equation W-31 of this section. After the
first survey cycle of ``n'' years is completed and beginning in
calendar year (n+1), the survey will continue on a rolling basis by
including the survey results from the current calendar year ``y'' and
survey results from all previous (n-1) calendar years, such that each
annual calculation of the emission factor ``EFs,MR,i'' from
Equation W-31 is based on survey results from ``n'' years. Upon
completion of a cycle, you may elect to change the number of years in
the next cycle period (to be 5 years or less). If the number of years
in the new cycle is greater than the number of years in the previous
cycle, calculate ``EFs,MR,i'' from Equation W-31 in each
year of the new cycle using the survey results from the current
calendar year and the survey results from the preceding number years
that is equal to the number of years in the previous cycle period. If
the number of years, ``nnew,'' in the new cycle is smaller
than the number of years in the previous cycle, ``n,'' calculate
``EFs,MR,i'' from Equation W-31 in each year of the new
cycle using the survey results from the current calendar year and
survey results from all previous (nnew-1) calendar years.
(xi) If you chose to conduct equipment leak surveys at all above
grade transmission-distribution transfer stations over multiple years,
``n,'' according to paragraph (q)(1)(vii) of this section, you must use
the meter/regulator run population emission factors calculated using
Equation W-31 of this section and the total count of all meter/
regulator runs at above grade transmission-distribution transfer
stations to calculate emissions from all above grade transmission-
distribution transfer stations using Equation W-32B in paragraph (r) of
this section.
(3) Calculation Method 2: Leaker measurement methodology. For
industry segments listed in Sec. 98.230(a)(2) through (9), if
equipment leaks are detected during surveys required or elected for
components listed in paragraphs (q)(1)(i) through (v) of this section,
you may elect to measure the volumetric flow rate of each natural gas
leak identified during a complete leak survey. If you elect to use this
method, you must use this method for all components included in a
complete leak survey and you must determine the volumetric flow rate of
each natural gas leak identified during the leak survey and aggregate
the emissions by the method of leak detection and component type as
specified in paragraphs (q)(3)(i) through (vii) of this section.
(i) Determine the volumetric flow rate of each natural gas leak
identified during the leak survey following the methods Sec. 98.234(b)
through (d), as appropriate for each leak identified. You do not need
to use the same measurement method for each leak measured.
(ii) For each leak, calculate the volume of natural gas emitted as
the product of the natural gas flow rate measured in paragraph
(q)(3)(i) of this section and the duration of the leak. If one leak
detection survey is conducted in the calendar year, assume the
component was leaking for the entire calendar year. If multiple leak
detection surveys are conducted in the calendar year, assume a
component found leaking in the first survey was leaking since the
beginning of the year until the date of the survey; assume a component
found leaking in the last survey of the year was leaking from the
preceding survey through the end of the year;
[[Page 50407]]
assume a component found leaking in a survey between the first and last
surveys of the year was leaking since the preceding survey until the
date of the survey. For each leaking component, account for time the
component was not operational (i.e., not operating under pressure)
using an engineering estimate based on best available data.
(iii) For each leak, convert the volumetric emissions of natural
gas determined in paragraph (q)(3)(ii) of this section to standard
conditions using the method specified in paragraph (t)(1) of this
section.
(iv) For each leak, convert the volumetric emissions of natural gas
at standard conditions determined in paragraph (q)(3)(iii) of this
section to CO2 and CH4 volumetric emissions at
standard conditions using the methods specified in paragraph (u) of
this section.
(v) For each leak, convert the GHG volumetric emissions at standard
conditions determined in paragraph (q)(3)(iv) of this section to GHG
mass emissions using the methods specified in paragraph (v) of this
section.
(vi) Sum the CO2 and CH4 mass emissions
determined in paragraph (q)(3)(v) of this section separately for each
type of component required to be surveyed by the method used for the
survey for which a leak was detected.
(vii) Multiply the total CO2 and CH4 mass
emissions by survey method and component type determined in paragraph
(q)(3)(vi) by the survey specific value for ``k'', the factor
adjustment for undetected leaks, where k equals 1.25 for the methods in
Sec. 98.234(q)(1), (3) and (5); k equals 1.55 for the method in Sec.
98.234(q)(2)(i); and k equals 1.27 for the method in Sec.
98.234(q)(2)(ii).
(viii) For natural gas distribution facilities:
(A) Use Equation W-31 of this section to determine the meter/
regulator run population emission factors for each GHGi
using the methods as specified in paragraphs (q)(2)(x)(A) and (B) of
this section, except use the GHG mass emissions calculated in paragraph
(q)(3)(vi) of this section rather than the emissions calculated using
Equation W-30.
(B) If you chose to conduct equipment leak surveys at all above
grade transmission-distribution transfer stations over multiple years,
``n,'' according to paragraph (q)(1)(vii) of this section, you must use
the meter/regulator run population emission factors calculated
according to paragraph (q)(3)(vii)(A) of this section and the total
count of all meter/regulator runs at above grade transmission-
distribution transfer stations to calculate emissions from all above
grade transmission-distribution transfer stations using Equation W-32B
in paragraph (r) of this section.
(4) Development of site-specific component-level leaker emission
factors by leak detection method. If you elect to measure leaks
according to Calculation Method 2 as specified in paragraph (q)(3) of
this section, you must use the measurement values determined in
accordance with paragraph (q)(3) of this section to calculate a site-
specific component-level leaker emission factor by leak detection
method as provided in paragraphs (q)(4)(i) through (iv) of this
section.
(i) You must track the leak measurements made separately for each
of the applicable components listed in paragraphs (q)(1)(i) through (v)
of this section and by the leak detection method according to the
following three bins.
(A) Method 21 as specified in Sec. 98.234(a)(2)(i).
(B) Method 21 as specified in Sec. 98.234(a)(2)(ii).
(C) Optical gas imaging (OGI) and other leak detection methods as
specified in Sec. 98.234(a)(1), (3), or (5).
(ii) You must accumulate a minimum of 50 leak measurements total
for a given component type and leak detection method combination before
you can develop and use a site-specific component-level leaker emission
factor for use in calculating emissions according to paragraph (q)(2)
of this section (Calculation Method 1: Leaker emission factor
calculation methodology).
(iii) Sum the volumetric flow rate of natural gas determined in
accordance with paragraph (q)(3)(i) of this section for each leak by
component type and leak detection method as specified in paragraph
(q)(4)(i) of this section meeting the minimum number of measurement
requirement in paragraph (q)(4)(ii) of this section.
(iv) Convert the volumetric flow rate of natural gas determined in
paragraph (q)(4)(iii) of this section to standard conditions using the
method specified in paragraph (t)(1) of this section.
(v) Determine the emission factor in units of standard cubic feet
per hour component (scf/hr-component) by dividing the sum of the
volumetric flow rate of natural gas determined in paragraph (q)(4)(iv)
of this section by the total number of leak measurements for that
component type and leak detection method combination.
(vi) You must update the emission factor determined in (q)(4)(v) of
this section annually to include the results from all complete leak
surveys for which leak measurement was performed during the reporting
year in accordance with paragraph (q)(3) of this section.
(r) Equipment leaks by population count. This paragraph (r) applies
to emissions sources listed in Sec. 98.232(c)(21)(ii), (f)(7), (g)(5),
(h)(6), and (j)(10)(ii) if you are not required to comply with
paragraph (q) of this section and if you do not elect to comply with
paragraph (q) of this section for these components in lieu of this
paragraph (r). This paragraph (r) also applies to emission sources
listed in Sec. 98.232(i)(2) through (6), (j)(11), and (m)(3) through
(5). To be subject to the requirements of this paragraph (r), the
listed emissions sources also must contact streams with gas content
greater than 10 percent CH4 plus CO2 by weight.
Emissions sources that contact streams with gas content less than or
equal to 10 percent CH4 plus CO2 by weight are
exempt from the requirements of this paragraph (r) and do not need to
be reported. Tubing systems equal to or less than one half inch
diameter are exempt from the requirements of this paragraph (r) and do
not need to be reported. Equipment leak components in vacuum service
are exempt from the survey and emission estimation requirements of this
paragraph (r) and only the count of these equipment must be reported.
You must calculate emissions from all emission sources listed in this
paragraph (r) using Equation W-32A of this section, except for natural
gas distribution facility emission sources listed in Sec.
98.232(i)(3). Natural gas distribution facility emission sources listed
in Sec. 98.232(i)(3) must calculate emissions using Equation W-32B of
this section and according to paragraph (r)(6)(ii) of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.031
[[Page 50408]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.032
Where:
Es,e,i = Annual volumetric emissions of GHGi
from the emission source type in standard cubic feet. The emission
source type may be a major equipment (e.g., wellhead, separator),
component (e.g., connector, open-ended line), below grade metering-
regulating station, below grade transmission-distribution transfer
station, distribution main, distribution service, gathering
pipeline, transmission company interconnect metering-regulating
station, farm tap and/or direct sale metering-regulating station, or
transmission pipeline.
Es,MR,i = Annual volumetric emissions of GHGi
from all meter/regulator runs at above grade metering regulating
stations that are not above grade transmission-distribution transfer
stations or, when used to calculate emissions according to paragraph
(q)(2)(xi) or (q)(3)(vii)(B) of this section, the annual volumetric
emissions of GHGi from all meter/regulator runs at above
grade transmission-distribution transfer stations.
Counte = Total number of the emission source type at the
facility. Onshore petroleum and natural gas production facilities
and onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities must count each major equipment piece listed in Table W-1
to this subpart. Onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities must also count the miles of gathering pipelines
by material type (protected steel, unprotected steel, plastic, or
cast iron). Underground natural gas storage facilities must count
each component listed in Table W-3 to this subpart. LNG storage
facilities must count the number of vapor recovery compressors. LNG
import and export facilities must count the number of vapor recovery
compressors. Natural gas distribution facilities must count the: (1)
Number of distribution services by material type; (2) miles of
distribution mains by material type; (3) number of below grade
transmission-distribution transfer stations; and (4) number of below
grade metering-regulating stations; as listed in Table W-5 to this
subpart. Onshore natural gas transmission pipeline facilities must
count the following, as listed in Table W-5 to this subpart: (1)
Miles of transmission pipelines by material type; (2) number of
transmission company interconnect metering-regulating stations; and
(3) number of farm tap and/or direct sale metering-regulating
stations.
CountMR = Total number of meter/regulator runs at above
grade metering-regulating stations that are not above grade
transmission-distribution transfer stations or, when used to
calculate emissions according to paragraph (q)(2)(xi) or
(q)(3)(vii)(B) of this section, the total number of meter/regulator
runs at above grade transmission-distribution transfer stations.
EFs,e = Population emission factor for the specific
emission source type, as listed in tables W-1, W-3, and W-5 to this
subpart.
EFs,MR,i = Meter/regulator run population emission factor
for GHGi based on all surveyed above grade transmission-
distribution transfer stations over ``n'' years, in standard cubic
feet of GHGi per operational hour of all meter/regulator
runs, as determined in Equation W-31 of this section.
GHGi = For onshore petroleum and natural gas production
facilities and onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities, concentration of GHGi,
CH4, or CO2, in produced natural gas as
defined in paragraph (u)(2) of this section; for onshore natural gas
transmission compression, underground natural gas storage, and
onshore natural gas transmission pipeline, GHGi equals
0.975 for CH4 and 1.1 x 10-\2\ for
CO2; for LNG storage and LNG import and export equipment,
GHGi equals 1 for CH4 and 0 for
CO2; and for natural gas distribution, GHGi
equals 1 for CH4 and 1.1 x 10-\2\
CO2.
Te = Average estimated time that each emission source
type associated with the equipment leak emission was operational in
the calendar year, in hours, using engineering estimate based on
best available data.
Tw,avg = Average estimated time that each meter/regulator
run was operational in the calendar year, in hours per meter/
regulator run, using engineering estimate based on best available
data.
(1) Calculate both CH4 and CO2 mass emissions
from volumetric emissions using calculations in paragraph (v) of this
section.
(2) Onshore petroleum and natural gas production facilities and
onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting facilities
must use the appropriate default whole gas population emission factors
listed in table W-1 of this subpart. Major equipment associated with
gas wells are considered gas service equipment in table W-1 of this
subpart. Onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities shall use the gas service equipment emission factors in
table W-1 of this subpart. Major equipment associated with crude oil
wells are considered crude service equipment in table W-1 of this
subpart. Where facilities conduct EOR operations, the emission factor
listed in table W-1 of this subpart shall be used to estimate all
streams of gases, including recycle CO2 stream. For meters/
piping, use one meters/piping per well-pad for onshore petroleum and
natural gas production operations and the number of meters in the
facility for onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
operations.
(3) Underground natural gas storage facilities must use the
appropriate default total hydrocarbon population emission factors for
storage wellheads in gas service listed in table W-3 to this subpart.
(4) LNG storage facilities must use the appropriate default methane
population emission factors for LNG storage compressors in gas service
listed in table W-5 to this subpart.
(5) LNG import and export facilities must use the appropriate
default methane population emission factors for LNG terminal
compressors in gas service listed in table W-5 to this subpart.
(6) Natural gas distribution facilities must use the appropriate
methane emission factors as described in paragraphs (r)(6)(i) and (ii)
of this section.
(i) Below grade transmission-distribution transfer stations, below
grade metering-regulating stations, distribution mains, and
distribution services must use the appropriate default methane
population emission factors listed in table W-5 of this subpart to
estimate emissions from components listed in Sec. 98.232(i)(2), (4),
(5), and (6), respectively.
(ii) Above grade metering-regulating stations that are not above
grade transmission-distribution transfer stations must use the meter/
regulator run population emission factor calculated in Equation W-31
for the components listed in Sec. 98.232(i)(3). Natural gas
distribution facilities that do not have above grade transmission-
distribution transfer stations are not required to calculate emissions
for above grade metering-regulating stations and are not required to
report GHG emissions in Sec. 98.236(r)(2)(v).
(7) Natural gas transmission pipeline facilities must use the
appropriate default methane population emission factors listed in table
W-5 of this subpart to estimate emissions from components listed in
Sec. 98.232(m)(3) through (5).
(s) Offshore petroleum and natural gas production facilities.
Report CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions for
offshore petroleum and natural gas production from all equipment leaks,
vented emission, and flare emission source types as identified by BOEM
in compliance with 30 CFR 550.302 through 304.
[[Page 50409]]
(1) Offshore production facilities that report to BOEM's emissions
inventory shall report the same annual emissions as calculated and
reported to BOEM as referenced in 30 CFR 550.302 through 304.
(i) For any reporting year that does not coincide with a BOEM
emissions inventory data collection year, report the most recent
published BOEM emissions inventory data referenced in 30 CFR 550.302
through 550.304. Adjust emissions based on the operating time for the
facility relative to the operating time in the most recent published
BOEM emissions inventory data.
(ii) As an alternative to the adjustment provisions in paragraph
(s)(1)(i) of this section, you may use the most recent monitoring and
calculation methods published by BOEM referenced in 30 CFR 550.302
through 550.304 to calculate and report annual emissions.
(2) Offshore production facilities that do not report to BOEM's
emissions inventory must use the most recent monitoring and calculation
methods published by BOEM referenced in 30 CFR 550.302 through 550.304
to calculate and report annual emissions.
(i) For any reporting year that does not coincide with a BOEM
emissions inventory data collection year, you may report the most
recent emissions data submitted to demonstrate compliance with this
subpart of part 98, with emissions adjusted based on the operating time
for the facility relative to operating time in the previous reporting
period.
(ii) As an alternative to the adjustment provisions in paragraph
(s)(2)(i) of this section, you may use the most recent monitoring and
calculation methods published by BOEM referenced in 30 CFR 550.302
through 550.304 to calculate and report annual emissions.
(3) If BOEM discontinues or delays their data collection effort by
more than 3 years, then offshore reporters shall once in every 3 years
use the most recent BOEM data collection and emissions estimation
methods to estimate emissions. These emission estimates would be used
to report emissions from the facility sources as required in paragraph
(s)(1)(i) of this section.
(4) For either first or subsequent year reporting, offshore
facilities either within or outside of BOEM jurisdiction that were not
covered in the previous BOEM data collection cycle must use the most
recent BOEM data collection and emissions estimation methods published
by BOEM referenced in 30 CFR 550.302 through 550.304 to calculate and
report emissions.
(t) * * *
(2) * * *
* * * * *
Za = Compressibility factor at actual conditions for
GHGi. You may use either a default compressibility factor of
1, or a site-specific compressibility factor based on actual
temperature and pressure conditions.
* * * * *
(u) * * *
(2) * * *
(ii) GHG mole fraction in feed natural gas for all emissions
sources upstream of the de-methanizer or dew point control and GHG mole
fraction in facility specific residue gas to transmission pipeline
systems for all emissions sources downstream of the de-methanizer
overhead or dew point control for onshore natural gas processing
facilities. For onshore natural gas processing plants that solely
fractionate a liquid stream, use the GHG mole percent in feed natural
gas liquid for all streams. If you have a continuous gas composition
analyzer on feed natural gas, you must use these values for determining
the mole fraction. If you do not have a continuous gas composition
analyzer, then annual samples must be taken according to methods set
forth in Sec. 98.234(b).
* * * * *
(y) Other large release events. Calculate CO2 and
CH4 emissions from other large release events as specified
in paragraphs (y)(2) through (5) of this section for each release that
meets or exceeds the applicable criteria in paragraph (y)(1) of this
section. You are not required to measure every release from your
facility, but if you have credible information that demonstrates the
release meets or exceeds one of the thresholds or credible information
that the release may reasonably be anticipated to meet or exceed (or to
have met or exceeded) one of the thresholds in paragraph (y)(1) of this
section, then you must calculate the event emissions and, if the
thresholds are confirmed to be exceeded, report the emissions as an
other large release event.
(1) You must report emissions for other large release events that
emit GHG at or above any applicable threshold listed in paragraphs
(y)(1)(i) or (ii) of this section considering the entire event
duration. The thresholds listed in paragraphs (y)(1)(i) or (ii) of this
section are not limited to the emissions that occur within a given
reporting year.
(i) For sources not subject to reporting under paragraphs (a)
through (s), (w), (x), (dd), or (ee) of this section (such as but not
limited to a fire, explosion, well blowout, or pressure relief), a
release that either:
(A) Emits methane at any point in time at a rate of 100 kg/hr or
greater; or
(B) Emits combined GHG across the entire event duration of 250
metric tons of CO2e or more.
(ii) For sources subject to reporting under paragraphs (a) through
(s), (w), (x), (dd), or (ee) of this section, a release that emits GHG
at or above at least one of the thresholds listed in paragraphs
(y)(1)(ii)(A) or (B) of this section. For a release meeting the
criteria in either paragraph (y)(1)(ii)(A) or (B) of this section, you
must report the emissions as an other large release event and exclude
the emissions from this release in the source-specific emissions
calculated under paragraphs (a) through (s), (w), (x), (dd), or (ee) of
this section, as applicable.
(A) Emits methane at any point in time at a rate of 100 kg/hr or
greater in excess of the emissions calculated from the source using the
applicable methods under paragraphs (a) through (s), (w), (x), (dd), or
(ee) of this section; or
(B) Emits combined GHG across the entire event duration of 250
metric tons of CO2e or more in excess of the emissions
calculated from the source using the applicable methods under
paragraphs (a) through (s), (w), (x), (dd), or (ee) of this section.
(2) Estimate the total volume of gas released during the event in
standard cubic feet and the methane emission rate at any point in time
during the event in kilograms per hour using measurement data according
to Sec. 98.234(b), if available, or a combination of process
knowledge, engineering estimates, and best available data when
measurement data are not available according to paragraphs (y)(2)(i)
through (v) of this section.
(i) The total volume of gas released must be estimated as the
product of the measured or estimated average flow or release rate and
the estimated event duration. For events for which information is
available showing variable or decaying flow rates, you must calculate
the maximum natural gas flow or release rate during the event and
either determine a representative average release rate across the
entire event or determine representative release rates for specific
time periods within the event duration. If you elect to determine
representative release rates for specific time periods within the event
duration, calculate the volume of gas released for each time period
within the event duration as the product of the representative release
rate and the length of the corresponding time period
[[Page 50410]]
and sum the volume of gas released across each of the time periods for
the full duration of the event.
(ii) The start time of the event must be determined based on
monitored process parameters. If monitored process parameters cannot
identify the start of the event, the event must be assumed to start on
the date of the most recent monitoring or measurement survey that
confirms the source was not emitting at or above the rates specified in
paragraph (y)(1) of this section or assumed to have a duration of 182
days, whichever duration is shorter.
(iii) The end time of the event must be the date of the confirmed
repair or confirmed cessation of emissions.
(iv) For the purposes of paragraph (y)(2)(ii) of this section,
``monitoring or measurement survey'' includes any monitoring or
measurement method in Sec. 98.234(a) through (d) as well as advanced
screening methods such as monitoring systems mounted on vehicles,
drones, helicopters, airplanes, or satellites capable of identifying
emissions at the thresholds specified in paragraph (y)(1).
(v) For events that span two different reporting years, calculate
the portion of the event's volumetric emissions calculated according to
paragraph (y)(2)(i) of this section that occurred in each reporting
year considering only reporting year 2025 and later reporting years.
For events with consistent flow or for which one average emissions rate
is used, use the relative duration of the event within each reporting
year to apportion the volume of gas released for each reporting year.
For variable flow events for which the volume of gas released is
estimated for separate time periods, sum the volume of gas released
across each of the time periods within a given reporting year
separately. If one of the time periods span two different reporting
years, calculate the portion of the volumetric emissions calculated for
that time period that applies to each reporting year based on the
number of hours in that time period within each reporting year.
(3) Determine the composition of the gas released to the atmosphere
using measurement data, if available, or a combination of process
knowledge, engineering estimates, and best available data when
measurement data are not available. In the event of an explosion or
fire, where a portion of the natural gas may be combusted, estimate the
composition of the gas released to the atmosphere considering the
fraction of natural gas released directly to the atmosphere and the
fraction of natural gas that was combusted by the explosion or fire
during the release event. Assume a maximum combustion efficiency of 92
percent for natural gas that is combusted in an explosion or fire when
estimating the CO2 composition of the release. You may use
different compositions for different periods within the duration if
available information suggests composition varied during the release
(e.g., if a portion of the release occurred while fire was present and
a portion of the release occurred when no fire was present).
(4) Calculate the GHG volumetric emissions using Equation W-35 in
paragraph (u)(1) of this section.
(5) Calculate both CH4 and CO2 mass emissions
from volumetric emissions using calculations in paragraph (v) of this
section.
(z) Onshore petroleum and natural gas production, onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting, and natural gas distribution
combustion emissions. Except as specified in paragraphs (z)(6) and (7)
of this section, calculate CO2, CH4, and
N2O combustion-related emissions from stationary or portable
equipment using the applicable method in paragraphs (z)(1) through (3)
of this section according to the fuel combusted as specified in those
paragraphs:
(1) If a fuel combusted in the stationary or portable equipment
meets the specifications of paragraph (z)(1)(i) of this section, then
calculate emissions according to paragraph (z)(1)(ii) of this section.
(i) The fuel combusted in the stationary or portable equipment is
listed in table C-1 of subpart C of this part or is a blend in which
all fuels are listed in table C-1. If the fuel is natural gas or the
blend contains natural gas, the natural gas must also meet the criteria
of paragraphs (z)(1)(i)(A) and (B) of this section.
(A) The natural gas must be of pipeline quality specification.
(B) The natural gas must have a minimum higher heating value of 950
Btu per standard cubic foot.
(ii) For fuels listed in paragraph (z)(1)(i) of this section,
calculate CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions
for each unit or group of units combusting the same fuel according to
any Tier listed in subpart C of this part, except that each natural
gas-fired reciprocating internal combustion engine or gas turbine must
use one of the methods in paragraph (z)(4) of this section to quantify
a CH4 emission factor instead of using the CH4
emission factor in table C-2 of subpart C of this part. You must follow
all applicable calculation requirements for that tier listed in Sec.
98.33, any monitoring or QA/QC requirements listed for that tier in
Sec. 98.34, any missing data procedures specified in Sec. 98.35, and
any recordkeeping requirements specified in Sec. 98.37. You must
report emissions according to paragraph (z)(5) of this section.
(2) If a fuel combusted in the stationary or portable equipment
meets the specifications of paragraph (z)(2)(i) of this section, then
calculate emissions according to paragraph (z)(2)(ii) of this section.
(i) The fuel combusted in the stationary or portable equipment is
natural gas that is not pipeline quality or it is a blend containing
natural gas that is not pipeline quality with only fuels that are
listed in table C-1. The natural gas must meet the criteria of
paragraphs (z)(2)(i)(A) through (C) of this section.
(A) The natural gas must have a minimum higher heating value of 950
Btu per standard cubic foot.
(B) The natural gas must have a maximum CO2 content of 1
percent by volume.
(C) The natural gas must have a minimum CH4 content of
85 percent by volume.
(ii) For fuels listed in paragraph (z)(2)(i) of this section,
calculate CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions
for each unit or group of units combusting the same fuel according to
Tier 2, Tier 3, or Tier 4 listed in subpart C of this part, except that
each natural gas-fired reciprocating engine or gas turbine must use one
of the methods in paragraph (z)(4) of this section to quantify a
CH4 emission factor instead of using the CH4
emission factor in table C-2 of subpart C of this part. You must follow
all applicable calculation requirements for that tier listed in Sec.
98.33, any monitoring or QA/QC requirements listed for that tier in
Sec. 98.34, any missing data procedures specified in Sec. 98.35, and
any recordkeeping requirements specified in Sec. 98.37. You must
report emissions according to paragraph (z)(5) of this section.
(3) If a fuel combusted in the stationary or portable equipment
meets the specifications of paragraph (z)(3)(i) of this section, then
calculate emissions according to paragraph (z)(3)(ii) of this section.
(i) The fuel combusted in the stationary or portable equipment does
not meet the criteria of either paragraph (z)(1)(i) or (z)(2)(i) of
this section. Examples include natural gas that is not of pipeline
quality, natural gas that has a higher heating value of less than 950
Btu per standard cubic feet, and natural gas that is not pipeline
quality and does not meet the composition criteria of either paragraph
(z)(2)(i)(B) or (C) of this section. Other examples include field
[[Page 50411]]
gas that does not meet the definition of natural gas in Sec. 98.238
and blends containing field gas that does not meet the definition of
natural gas in Sec. 98.238.
(ii) For fuels listed in paragraph (z)(3)(i) of this section,
calculate combustion emissions for each unit or group of units
combusting the same fuel as follows:
(A) You may use company records to determine the volume of fuel
combusted in the unit or group of units during the reporting year.
(B) If you have a continuous gas composition analyzer on fuel to
the combustion unit(s), you must use these compositions for determining
the concentration of each constituent in the flow of gas to the unit or
group of units. If you do not have a continuous gas composition
analyzer on gas to the combustion unit(s), you may use engineering
estimates based on best available data to determine the concentration
of each constituent in the flow of gas to the unit or group of units.
Otherwise, you must use the appropriate gas compositions for each
stream going to the combustion unit(s) as specified in paragraph (u)(2)
of this section.
(C) Calculate GHG volumetric emissions at actual conditions using
Equations W-39A and W-39B of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.034
Where:
Ea,CO2 = Contribution of annual CO2 emissions
from portable or stationary fuel combustion sources in cubic feet,
under actual conditions.
Va = Volume of gas sent to the combustion unit or group
of units in actual cubic feet, during the year.
YCO2 = Mole fraction of CO2 in gas sent to the
combustion unit or group of units.
[eta] = Fraction of gas combusted for portable and stationary
equipment determined using engineering estimation. For internal
combustion devices that are not reciprocating internal combustion
engines or gas turbines, a default of 0.995 can be used. For two-
stroke lean-burn reciprocating internal combustion engines, a
default of 0.953 must be used; for four-stroke lean-burn
reciprocating internal combustion engines, a default of 0.962 must
be used; for four-stroke rich-burn reciprocating internal combustion
engines, a default of 0.997 must be used, and for gas turbines, a
default of 0.999 must be used.
Yj = Mole fraction of hydrocarbon constituent j (such as
methane, ethane, propane, butane, and pentanes plus) in gas sent to
the combustion unit or group of units.
Rj = Number of carbon atoms in the hydrocarbon
constituent j in gas sent to the combustion unit or group of units;
1 for methane, 2 for ethane, 3 for propane, 4 for butane, and 5 for
pentanes plus.
Ea,CH4 = Contribution of annual CH4 emissions
from portable or stationary fuel combustion sources in cubic feet,
under actual conditions.
YCH4 = Mole fraction of methane in gas sent to the
combustion unit or group of units.
(D) Calculate GHG volumetric emissions at standard conditions using
calculations in paragraph (t) of this section.
(E) Calculate both combustion-related CH4 and
CO2 mass emissions from volumetric CH4 and
CO2 emissions using calculation in paragraph (v) of this
section.
(F) Calculate N2O mass emissions using Equation W-40 of
this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.035
Where:
MassN2O = Annual N2O emissions from the
combustion of a particular type of fuel (metric tons).
Fuel = Annual mass or volume of the fuel combusted (mass or volume
per year, choose appropriately to be consistent with the units of
HHV).
HHV = Site-specific higher heating value of the fuel, mmBtu/unit of
the fuel (in units consistent with the fuel quantity combusted).
EF = Use 1.0 x 10-4 kg N2O/mmBtu.
1 x 10-3 = Conversion factor from kilograms to metric
tons.
(4) For each natural gas-fired reciprocating internal combustion
engine or gas turbine calculating emissions according to paragraph
(z)(1)(ii) or (z)(2)(ii) of this section, you must determine a
CH4 emission factor (kg CH4/MMBtu) using one of
the methods provided in paragraphs (z)(4)(i) through (iii) of this
section. If you are required to or elect to use the method in paragraph
(z)(4)(i) of this section, you must use the results of the performance
test to determine the CH4 emission factor.
(i) Conduct a performance test following the applicable procedures
in Sec. 98.234(i).
(ii) Original equipment manufacturer information, which may include
manufacturer specification sheets, emissions certification data, or
other manufacturer data providing expected emission rates from the
reciprocating internal combustion engine or gas turbine.
(iii) Applicable equipment type-specific emission factor from table
W-7 of this subpart.
(5) Emissions from fuel combusted in stationary or portable
equipment at onshore petroleum and natural gas production facilities,
at onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting facilities,
and at natural gas distribution facilities that are calculated
according to the procedures in either paragraph (z)(1)(ii) or
(z)(2)(ii) of this section must be reported according to the
requirements specified in Sec. 98.236(z) rather than the reporting
requirements specified in subpart C of this part.
(6) External fuel combustion sources with a rated heat capacity
equal to or less than 5 mmBtu/hr do not need to report combustion
emissions or include these emissions for threshold determination in
Sec. 98.231(a). You must report the type and number of each external
fuel combustion unit.
(7) Internal fuel combustion sources, not compressor-drivers, with
a rated heat capacity equal to or less than 1 mmBtu/hr (or the
equivalent of 130 horsepower), do not need to report combustion
emissions or include these
[[Page 50412]]
emissions for threshold determination in Sec. 98.231(a). You must
report the type and number of each internal fuel combustion unit.
(aa) through (cc) [Reserved]
(dd) Drilling mud degassing. Calculate annual volumetric
CH4 emissions from the degassing of drilling mud using one
of the calculation methods described in paragraphs (dd)(1) or (2) of
this section. If you have taken mudlogging measurements, including gas
trap-derived gas concentration and mud pumping rate, you must use
Calculation Method 1 as described in paragraph (dd)(1) of this section.
If you have not taken mudlogging measurements, you may use Calculation
Method 2 as described in paragraph (dd)(2) of this section.
(1) Calculation Method 1. For each well in the sub-basin in which
drilling mud was used during well drilling, you must calculate
CH4 emissions from drilling mud degassing applying an
emissions rate derived from a representative well in the same sub-basin
and at the same approximate total depth. You must follow the procedures
specified in paragraph (dd)(1)(i) of this section to calculate
CH4 emissions for the representative well and follow the
procedures in paragraphs (dd)(1)(ii) through (iv) of this section to
calculate CH4 emissions for every well drilled in the sub-
basin and at the same approximate total depth.
(i) Calculate CH4 emissions from mud degassing for one
representative well in each sub-basin and at each approximate total
depth. For the representative well, you must use mudlogging
measurements, including gas trap derived gas concentration and mud
pumping rate, taken during the reporting year. In the first year of
reporting, you may use measurements from the prior reporting year if
measurements from the current reporting year are not available. Use
Equation W-41 of this section to calculate natural gas emissions from
mud degassing at the representative well. You must identify and
calculate CH4 emissions for a new representative well for
the sub-basin and same approximate total depth every 2 calendar years
or on a more frequent basis. If a representative well is not available
in the same sub-basin and at the same targeted approximate total depth,
you may choose a well within the facility that is drilled into the same
formation and at the same approximate total depth.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.036
Where:
Es,CH4,r = Annual total volumetric CH4
emissions from mud degassing for the representative well, r, in
standard cubic feet.
MRr = Average mud rate for the representative well, r, in
gallons per minute.
Tr = Total time that drilling mud is circulated in the
representative well, r, in minutes.
Xn = Concentration of natural gas in the drilling mud as
measured by the gas trap, in parts per million.
GHGCH4 = Measured mole fraction of CH4 in
natural gas entrained in the drilling mud.
0.1337 = Conversion from gallons to standard cubic feet.
(ii) Calculate the emissions rate of CH4 in standard
cubic feet per minute from the representative well using Equation W-42
of this section.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.037
Where:
ERs,CH4,r = Volumetric CH4 emission rate from
mud degassing for the representative well, r, in standard cubic feet
per minute.
Es,CH4,r = Annual total volumetric CH4
emissions from mud degassing for the representative well, r, in
standard cubic feet.
Tr = Total time that drilling mud is circulated in the
representative well, r, in minutes.
(iii) Use Equation W-43 of this section to calculate emissions for
any wells drilled in the same sub-basin and targeting the same
approximate total depth in the reporting year.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.038
Where:
Es,CH4,p = Annual total CH4 emissions from mud
degassing for the well, p, in standard cubic feet.
ERs,CH4,r = Volumetric CH4 emission rate from
mud degassing for the representative well, r, in standard cubic feet
per minute.
Tp = Total time that drilling mud is circulated in the
well, p, during the reporting year, in minutes.
(iv) Calculate CH4 mass emissions using calculations in
paragraph (v) of this section.
(2) Calculation Method 2. If you did not take mudlogging
measurements, calculate emissions from mud degassing for each well
using Equation W-44 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.039
Where:
MassCH4,p = Annual total CH4 emissions for the
well, p, in metric tons.
EFCH4 = Emission factor in metric tons CH4 per
drilling day. Use 0.2605 for water-based drilling muds, 0.0586 for
oil-based drilling muds, and 0.0586 for synthetic drilling muds.
DDp = Total number of drilling days for the well, p. The
first drilling day is the day
[[Page 50413]]
that the borehole penetrated the first hydrocarbon-bearing zone and
the last drilling day is the day drilling mud ceases to be
circulated in the wellbore.
(ee) Crankcase venting. For reciprocating internal combustion
engines or gas turbines, calculate annual CH4 volumetric
emissions from crankcase venting at standard conditions using Equation
W-45 of this section:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP01AU23.040
Where:
ECH4 = Annual total volumetric emissions of
CH4 from crankcase venting on reciprocating internal
combustion engines or gas turbines, in standard cubic feet.
EF = Emission factor for crankcase venting on reciprocating internal
combustion engines or gas turbines, in standard cubic feet gas per
hour per crankcase vent. Use 2.28 standard cubic feet gas per hour
per crankcase vent.
GHGCH4 = Average concentration of CH4 in the
gas stream entering reciprocating internal combustion engines or gas
turbines. If the concentration of CH4 is unknown, use the
concentration of CH4 in the gas stream either using
engineering estimates based on best available data or as defined in
paragraph (u)(2) of this section.
Count = Total number of crankcase vents on reciprocating internal
combustion engines or gas turbines.
T = Total operating hours per year for reciprocating internal
combustion engines or gas turbines with crankcase vents.
0
13. Amend Sec. 98.234 by:
0
a. Revising the introductory text and paragraphs (a) and (d)(3);
0
b. Adding paragraph (d)(5);
0
c. Removing the text ``Equation W-41'' and ``Eq. W-41'' in paragraph
(e) and adding in its place the text ``Equation W-46'' and ``Eq. W-
46'', respectively;
0
d. Removing and reserving paragraphs (f) and (g); and
0
e. Adding paragraph (i).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 98.234 Monitoring and QA/QC requirements.
The GHG emissions data for petroleum and natural gas emissions
sources must be quality assured as applicable as specified in this
section. Offshore petroleum and natural gas production facilities shall
adhere to the monitoring and QA/QC requirements as set forth in 30 CFR
550.
(a) You must use any of the applicable methods described in
paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of this section to conduct leak
detection(s) or screening survey(s) as specified in Sec. 98.233(k),
(o), and (p) that occur during a calendar year. You must use any of the
methods described in paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of this section to
conduct leak detection(s) of equipment leaks from components as
specified in Sec. 98.233(q)(1)(i) or (ii) or (q)(1)(v)(A) that occur
during a calendar year. You must use one of the methods described in
paragraph (a)(1)(ii) or (iii) or (a)(2)(ii) of this section, as
applicable, to conduct leak detection(s) of equipment leaks from
components as specified in Sec. 98.233(q)(1)(iii) or (q)(1)(v)(B). If
electing to comply with Sec. 98.233(q) as specified in Sec.
98.233(q)(1)(iv), you must use any of the methods described in
paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of this section to conduct leak
detection(s) of equipment leaks from component types as specified in
Sec. 98.233(q)(1)(iv) that occur during a calendar year. Inaccessible
emissions sources, as defined in 40 CFR part 60, are not exempt from
this subpart. If the primary leak detection method employed cannot be
used to monitor inaccessible components without elevating the
monitoring personnel more than 2 meters above a support surface, you
must use alternative leak detection devices as described in paragraph
(a)(1) or (3) of this section to monitor inaccessible equipment leaks
or vented emissions at least once per calendar year.
(1) Optical gas imaging instrument. Use an optical gas imaging
instrument for equipment leak detection as specified in either
paragraph (a)(1)(i), (ii), or (iii) of this section. You may use any of
the methods as specified in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (iii) of this
section unless you are required to use a specific method in Sec.
98.233(q)(1).
(i) Optical gas imaging instrument as specified in Sec. 60.18 of
this chapter. Use an optical gas imaging instrument for equipment leak
detection in accordance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart A, Sec. 60.18 of
the Alternative work practice for monitoring equipment leaks, Sec.
60.18(i)(1)(i); Sec. 60.18(i)(2)(i) except that the minimum monitoring
frequency shall be annual using the detection sensitivity level of 60
grams per hour as stated in 40 CFR part 60, subpart A, Table 1:
Detection Sensitivity Levels; Sec. 60.18(i)(2)(ii) and (iii) except
the gas chosen shall be methane, and Sec. 60.18(i)(2)(iv) and (v);
Sec. 60.18(i)(3); Sec. 60.18(i)(4)(i) and (v); including the
requirements for daily instrument checks and distances, and excluding
requirements for video records. Any emissions detected by the optical
gas imaging instrument from an applicable component is a leak. In
addition, you must operate the optical gas imaging instrument to image
the source types required by this subpart in accordance with the
instrument manufacturer's operating parameters.
(ii) Optical gas imaging instrument as specified in Sec. 60.5397a
of this chapter. Use an optical gas imaging instrument for equipment
leak detection in accordance with Sec. 60.5397a(c)(3) and (7), and (e)
of this chapter and paragraphs (a)(1)(ii)(A) through (C) of this
section.
(A) For the purposes of this subpart, any visible emissions
observed by the optical gas imaging instrument from a component
required or elected to be monitored as specified in Sec. 98.233(q)(1)
is a leak.
(B) For the purposes of this subpart, the term ``fugitive emissions
component'' in Sec. 60.5397a of this chapter means ``component.''
(C) For the purpose of complying with Sec. 98.233(q)(1)(iv), the
phrase ``the collection of fugitive emissions components at well sites
and compressor stations'' in Sec. 60.5397a of this chapter means ``the
collection of components for which you elect to comply with Sec.
98.233(q)(1)(iv).''
(iii) Optical gas imaging instrument as specified in appendix K to
part 60 of this chapter. Use an optical gas imaging instrument for
equipment leak detection in accordance with appendix K to part 60,
Determination of Volatile Organic Compound and Greenhouse Gas Leaks
Using Optical Gas Imaging. Any emissions detected by the optical gas
imaging instrument from an applicable component is a leak.
(2) Method 21. Use the equipment leak detection methods in Method
21 in appendix A-7 to part 60 of this chapter as specified in paragraph
(a)(2)(i) or (ii) of this section. You may use either of the methods as
specified in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section unless you
are required to use a specific method in Sec. 98.233(q)(1). You must
survey all applicable source types at the facility needed to conduct a
complete equipment leak survey as defined in Sec. 98.233(q)(1). For
the purposes of this subpart, the term ``fugitive emissions
[[Page 50414]]
component'' in Sec. 60.5397a of this chapter and Sec. 60.5397b of
this chapter means ``component.''
(i) Method 21 with a leak definition of 10,000 ppm. Use the
equipment leak detection methods in Method 21 in appendix A-7 to part
60 of this chapter using methane as the reference compound. If an
instrument reading of 10,000 ppm or greater is measured for any
applicable component, a leak is detected.
(ii) Method 21 with a leak definition of 500 ppm. Use the equipment
leak detection methods in Method 21 in appendix A-7 to part 60 of this
chapter using methane as the reference compound. If an instrument
reading of 500 ppm or greater is measured for any applicable component,
a leak is detected.
(3) Infrared laser beam illuminated instrument. Use an infrared
laser beam illuminated instrument for equipment leak detection. Any
emissions detected by the infrared laser beam illuminated instrument is
a leak. In addition, you must operate the infrared laser beam
illuminated instrument to detect the source types required by this
subpart in accordance with the instrument manufacturer's operating
parameters.
(4) [Reserved]
(5) Acoustic leak detection device. Use the acoustic leak detection
device to detect through-valve leakage. When using the acoustic leak
detection device to quantify the through-valve leakage, you must use
the instrument manufacturer's calculation methods to quantify the
through-valve leak. When using the acoustic leak detection device, if a
leak of 3.1 scf per hour or greater is calculated, a leak is detected.
In addition, you must operate the acoustic leak detection device to
monitor the source valves required by this subpart in accordance with
the instrument manufacturer's operating parameters. Acoustic
stethoscope type devices designed to detect through-valve leakage when
put in contact with the valve body and that provide an audible leak
signal but do not calculate a leak rate can be used to identify
through-valve leakage. For these acoustic stethoscope type devices, a
leak is detected if an audible leak signal is observed or registered by
the device. If the acoustic stethoscope type device is used as a
screening to a measurement method and a leak is detected, the leak must
be measured using any one of the methods specified in paragraphs (b)
through (d) of this section.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(3) For high volume samplers that output methane mass emissions,
you must use the calculations in Sec. 98.233(u) and (v) in reverse to
determine the natural gas volumetric emissions at standard conditions.
For high volume samplers that output methane volumetric flow in actual
conditions, divide the volumetric methane flow rate by the mole
fraction of methane in the natural gas according to the provisions in
Sec. 98.233(u) and estimate natural gas volumetric emissions at
standard conditions using calculations in Sec. 98.233(t). Estimate
CH4 and CO2 volumetric and mass emissions from
volumetric natural gas emissions using the calculations in Sec.
98.233(u) and (v).
* * * * *
(5) If the measured methane flow exceeds the manufacturer's
reported quantitation limit or if the measured natural gas flow
determined as specified in paragraph (d)(3) of this section exceeds 70
percent of the manufacturer's reported maximum sampling flow rate, then
the flow exceeds the capacity of the instrument and you must either use
a temporary or permanent flow meter according to paragraph (b) of this
section or use calibrated bags according to paragraph (c) of this
section to determine the leak or flow rate.
* * * * *
(i) You must use any of the applicable methods described in
paragraphs (j)(1) through (3) of this section to conduct a performance
test to determine the concentration of CH4 in the exhaust
gas. This concentration must be used to develop a CH4
emission factor (kg/MMBtu) for estimating combustion slip from
reciprocating internal combustion engines or gas turbines as specified
in Sec. 98.233(z)(4). Each performance test must be conducted within
10 percent of 100 percent peak load. You may not conduct performance
tests during period of startup, shutdown or malfunction. You must
conduct three separate test runs for each performance test. Each test
run must be conducted within 10 percent of 100 percent peak (or the
highest achievable) load and last at least 1 hour.
(1) EPA Method 18, Volatile Organic Compounds by Gas Chromatography
in appendix A-6 to part 60 of this chapter.
(2) EPA Method 320, Measurement of Vapor Phase Organic and
Inorganic Emissions by Extractive Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR)
Spectroscopy in appendix A to part 63 of this chapter.
(3) ASTM D6348-12 Standard Test Method for Determination of Gaseous
Compounds by Extractive Direct Interface Fourier Transform Infrared
(FTIR) Spectroscopy (incorporated by reference, see Sec. 98.7).
0
14. Amend Sec. 98.235 by revising paragraph (f) to read as follows:
Sec. 98.235 Procedures for estimating missing data.
* * * * *
(f) For the first 6 months of required data collection, facilities
that are currently subject to this subpart W and that start up new
emission sources or acquire new sources from another facility that were
not previously subject to this subpart W may use best engineering
estimates for any data related to those newly operating or newly
acquired sources that cannot reasonably be measured or obtained
according to the requirements of this subpart.
* * * * *
0
15. Amend Sec. 98.236 by:
0
a. Revising the introductory text and paragraph (a) introductory text,
paragraphs (a)(1) through (8), (a)(9) introductory text, (a)(9)(iii),
(vi), and (xii);
0
b. Adding paragraphs (a)(9)(xiii) and (xiv);
0
c. Revising paragraphs (a)(10), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f)(1) introductory
text, (f)(1)(i) through (vii), and (f)(1)(xi) introductory text;
0
d. Adding paragraph (f)(1)(xi)(F);
0
e. Revising paragraph (f)(1)(xii) introductory text;
0
f. Adding paragraph (f)(1)(xii)(F);
0
g. Revising paragraphs (f)(2) introductory text and (f)(2)(i), (iii)
through (v), (ix), and (x);
0
h. Adding paragraphs (f)(2)(xi) and (xii);
0
i. Revising paragraphs (g) introductory text, (g)(1) through (3),
(g)(5)(i) through (iii), (g)(6) and (10), (h)(1) introductory text,
(h)(1)(i), (iii), and (iv), (h)(2) introductory text, (h)(2)(i), (iii),
and (iv);
0
j. Removing paragraphs (h)(2)(v) through (vii);
0
k. Revising paragraphs (h)(3) introductory text, (h)(3)(i), (h)(4), (i)
introductory text, and (i)(1) introductory text;
0
l. Redesignating paragraphs (i)(1)(i) through (iii) as (i)(1)(ii)
through (iv), respectively;
0
m. Adding new paragraph (i)(1)(i);
0
n. Revising paragraph (i)(2), (j), (k) introductory text, (k)(1),
(k)(2) introductory text, and (k)(2)(i);
0
o. Removing paragraph (k)(3);
0
p. Revising paragraphs (l)(1) introductory text, (l)(1)(i) through (v),
(l)(2), (l)(3) introductory text, (l)(3)(i) through (iv), (l)(4), (m)
introductory text, and (m)(1) and (4) through (7);
0
q. Removing paragraph (m)(8);
0
r. Revising paragraphs (n), (o) introductory text, (o)(1), (o)(2)(i)(A)
and (B), (o)(2)(ii)(A), (o)(2)(ii)(D)
[[Page 50415]]
introductory text, (o)(2)(ii)(E), (o)(5), (p) introductory text,
(p)(1), (p)(2)(ii)(A), (p)(2)(ii)(D) introductory text, (p)(2)(ii)(E),
(p)(3)(ii) introductory text, (p)(5), (q) introductory text, (q)(1) and
(2), (r) introductory text, (r)(1) and (3), (s), (x)(1), (y), (z), (aa)
introductory text, (aa)(1) introductory text, (aa)(1)(i) introductory
text, and (aa)(1)(i)(B) and (C);
0
s. Adding paragraph (aa)(1)(i)(D);
0
t. Revising paragraphs (aa)(1)(ii)(D) through (H);
0
u. Adding paragraph (aa)(1)(iii) and (iv);
0
v. Revising paragraphs (aa)(2), (aa)(3) introductory text, and
(aa)(3)(i);
0
w. Adding paragraphs (aa)(3)(viii) and (ix);
0
x. Revising paragraphs (aa)(4)(i), (aa)(5)(ii), (aa)(6) and (7), and
(aa)(8)(ii);
0
y. Removing and reserving paragraph (aa)(9);
0
z. Revising paragraphs (aa)(10) introductory text and (aa)(10)(ii) and
(iv);
0
aa. Adding paragraph (aa)(10)(v);
0
bb. Revising paragraphs (aa)(11)(ii) through (iv), (bb) introductory
text, and (cc); and
0
cc. Adding paragraphs (dd) and (ee).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 98.236 Data reporting requirements.
In addition to the information required by Sec. 98.3(c), each
annual report must contain reported emissions and related information
as specified in this section. Reporters that use a flow or volume
measurement system that corrects to standard conditions as provided in
the introductory text in Sec. 98.233 for data elements that are
otherwise required to be determined at actual conditions, report gas
volumes at standard conditions rather than the gas volumes at actual
conditions and report the standard temperature and pressure used by the
measurement system rather than the actual temperature and pressure.
(a) The annual report must include the information specified in
paragraphs (a)(1) through (10) of this section for each applicable
industry segment. The annual report must also include annual emissions
totals, in metric tons of each GHG, for each applicable industry
segment listed in paragraphs (a)(1) through (10) of this section, and
each applicable emission source listed in paragraphs (b) through (z),
(dd) and (ee) of this section.
(1) Onshore petroleum and natural gas production. For the
equipment/activities specified in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) through (xxii)
of this section, report the information specified in the applicable
paragraphs of this section.
(i) Natural gas pneumatic devices. Report the information specified
in paragraph (b) of this section.
(ii) Natural gas driven pneumatic pumps. Report the information
specified in paragraph (c) of this section.
(iii) Acid gas removal units and nitrogen removal units. Report the
information specified in paragraph (d) of this section.
(iv) Dehydrators. Report the information specified in paragraph (e)
of this section.
(v) Liquids unloading. Report the information specified in
paragraph (f) of this section.
(vi) Completions and workovers with hydraulic fracturing. Report
the information specified in paragraph (g) of this section.
(vii) Completions and workovers without hydraulic fracturing.
Report the information specified in paragraph (h) of this section.
(viii) Blowdown vent stacks. Report the information specified in
paragraph (i) of this section.
(ix) Hydrocarbon liquids and produced water storage tanks. Report
the information specified in paragraph (j) of this section.
(x) Well testing. Report the information specified in paragraph (l)
of this section.
(xi) Associated natural gas. Report the information specified in
paragraph (m) of this section.
(xii) Flare stacks. Report the information specified in paragraph
(n) of this section.
(xiii) Centrifugal compressors. Report the information specified in
paragraph (o) of this section.
(xiv) Reciprocating compressors. Report the information specified
in paragraph (p) of this section.
(xv) Equipment leak surveys. Report the information specified in
paragraph (q) of this section.
(xvi) Equipment leaks by population count. Report the information
specified in paragraph (r) of this section.
(xvii) EOR injection pumps. Report the information specified in
paragraph (w) of this section.
(xviii) EOR hydrocarbon liquids. Report the information specified
in paragraph (x) of this section.
(xix) Other large release events. Report the information specified
in paragraph (y) of this section.
(xx) Combustion equipment. Report the information specified in
paragraph (z) of this section.
(xxi) Drilling mud degassing. Report the information specified in
paragraph (dd) of this section.
(xxii) Crankcase vents. Reporting the information specified in
paragraph (ee) of this section.
(2) Offshore petroleum and natural gas production. For the
equipment/activities specified in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and (ii) of this
section, report the information specified in the applicable paragraphs
of this section.
(i) Offshore petroleum and natural gas production. Report the
information specified in paragraph (s) of this section.
(ii) Other large release events. Report the information specified
in paragraph (y) of this section.
(3) Onshore natural gas processing. For the equipment/activities
specified in paragraphs (a)(3)(i) through (xi) of this section, report
the information specified in the applicable paragraphs of this section.
(i) Natural gas pneumatic devices. Report the information specified
in paragraph (b) of this section.
(ii) Acid gas removal units and nitrogen removal units. Report the
information specified in paragraph (d) of this section.
(iii) Dehydrators. Report the information specified in paragraph
(e) of this section.
(iv) Blowdown vent stacks. Report the information specified in
paragraph (i) of this section.
(v) Hydrocarbon liquids and produced water storage tanks. Report
the information specified in paragraph (j) of this section.
(vi) Flare stacks. Report the information specified in paragraph
(n) of this section.
(vii) Centrifugal compressors. Report the information specified in
paragraph (o) of this section.
(viii) Reciprocating compressors. Report the information specified
in paragraph (p) of this section.
(ix) Equipment leak surveys. Report the information specified in
paragraph (q) of this section.
(x) Other large release events. Report the information specified in
paragraph (y) of this section.
(xi) Crankcase vents. Report the information specified in paragraph
(ee) of this section.
(4) Onshore natural gas transmission compression. For the
equipment/activities specified in paragraphs (a)(4)(i) through (x) of
this section, report the information specified in the applicable
paragraphs of this section.
(i) Natural gas pneumatic devices. Report the information specified
in paragraph (b) of this section.
(ii) Dehydrators. Report the information specified in paragraph (e)
of this section.
(iii) Blowdown vent stacks. Report the information specified in
paragraph (i) of this section.
[[Page 50416]]
(iv) Condensate storage tanks. Report the information specified in
paragraph (k) of this section.
(v) Flare stacks. Report the information specified in paragraph (n)
of this section.
(vi) Centrifugal compressors. Report the information specified in
paragraph (o) of this section.
(vii) Reciprocating compressors. Report the information specified
in paragraph (p) of this section.
(viii) Equipment leak surveys. Report the information specified in
paragraph (q) of this section.
(ix) Other large release events. Report the information specified
in paragraph (y) of this section.
(x) Crankcase vents. Reporting the information specified in
paragraph (ee) of this section.
(5) Underground natural gas storage. For the equipment/activities
specified in paragraphs (a)(5)(i) through (xi) of this section, report
the information specified in the applicable paragraphs of this section.
(i) Natural gas pneumatic devices. Report the information specified
in paragraph (b) of this section.
(ii) Dehydrators. Report the information specified in paragraph (e)
of this section.
(iii) Blowdown vent stacks. Report the information specified in
paragraph (i) of this section.
(iv) Condensate storage tanks. Report the information specified in
paragraph (k) of this section.
(v) Flare stacks. Report the information specified in paragraph (n)
of this section.
(vi) Centrifugal compressors. Report the information specified in
paragraph (o) of this section.
(vii) Reciprocating compressors. Report the information specified
in paragraph (p) of this section.
(viii) Equipment leak surveys. Report the information specified in
paragraph (q) of this section.
(ix) Equipment leaks by population count. Report the information
specified in paragraph (r) of this section.
(x) Other large release events. Report the information specified in
paragraph (y) of this section.
(xi) Crankcase vents. Reporting the information specified in
paragraph (ee) of this section.
(6) LNG storage. For the equipment/activities specified in
paragraphs (a)(6)(i) through (ix) of this section, report the
information specified in the applicable paragraphs of this section.
(i) Acid gas removal units and nitrogen removal units. Report the
information specified in paragraph (d) of this section.
(ii) Blowdown vent stacks. Report the information specified in
paragraph (i) of this section.
(iii) Flare stacks. Report the information specified in paragraph
(n) of this section.
(iv) Centrifugal compressors. Report the information specified in
paragraph (o) of this section.
(v) Reciprocating compressors. Report the information specified in
paragraph (p) of this section.
(vi) Equipment leak surveys. Report the information specified in
paragraph (q) of this section.
(vii) Equipment leaks by population count. Report the information
specified in paragraph (r) of this section.
(viii) Other large release events. Report the information specified
in paragraph (y) of this section.
(ix) Crankcase vents. Reporting the information specified in
paragraph (ee) of this section.
(7) LNG import and export equipment. For the equipment/activities
specified in paragraphs (a)(7)(i) through (ix) of this section, report
the information specified in the applicable paragraphs of this section.
(i) Acid gas removal units and nitrogen removal units. Report the
information specified in paragraph (d) of this section.
(ii) Blowdown vent stacks. Report the information specified in
paragraph (i) of this section.
(iii) Flare stacks. Report the information specified in paragraph
(n) of this section.
(iv) Centrifugal compressors. Report the information specified in
paragraph (o) of this section.
(v) Reciprocating compressors. Report the information specified in
paragraph (p) of this section.
(vi) Equipment leak surveys. Report the information specified in
paragraph (q) of this section.
(vii) Equipment leaks by population count. Report the information
specified in paragraph (r) of this section.
(viii) Other large release events. Report the information specified
in paragraph (y) of this section.
(ix) Crankcase vents. Reporting the information specified in
paragraph (ee) of this section.
(8) Natural gas distribution. For the equipment/activities
specified in paragraphs (a)(8)(i) through (vii) of this section, report
the information specified in the applicable paragraphs of this section.
(i) Natural gas pneumatic devices. Report the information specified
in paragraph (b) of this section.
(ii) Blowdown vent stacks. Report the information specified in
paragraph (i) of this section.
(iii) Equipment leak surveys. Report the information specified in
paragraph (q) of this section.
(iv) Equipment leaks by population count. Report the information
specified in paragraph (r) of this section.
(v) Other large release events. Report the information specified in
paragraph (y) of this section.
(vi) Combustion equipment. Report the information specified in
paragraph (z) of this section.
(vii) Crankcase vents. Reporting the information specified in
paragraph (ee) of this section.
(9) Onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting. For
the equipment/activities specified in paragraphs (a)(9)(i) through
(xiv) of this section, report the information specified in the
applicable paragraphs of this section.
* * * * *
(iii) Acid gas removal units and nitrogen removal units. Report the
information specified in paragraph (d) of this section.
* * * * *
(vi) Hydrocarbon liquids and produced water storage tanks. Report
the information specified in paragraph (j) of this section.
* * * * *
(xii) Other large release events. Report the information specified
in paragraph (y) of this section.
(xiii) Combustion equipment. Report the information specified in
paragraph (z) of this section.
(xiv) Crankcase vents. Reporting the information specified in
paragraph (ee) of this section.
(10) Onshore natural gas transmission pipeline. For the equipment/
activities specified in paragraphs (a)(10)(i) through (iii) of this
section, report the information specified in the applicable paragraphs
of this section.
(i) Blowdown vent stacks. Report the information specified in
paragraph (i) of this section.
(ii) Equipment leaks by population count. Report the information
specified in paragraph (r) of this section.
(iii) Other large release events. Report the information specified
in paragraph (y) of this section.
(b) Natural gas pneumatic devices. You must indicate whether the
facility contains the following types of equipment: Continuous high
bleed natural gas pneumatic devices, continuous low bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices, and intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic
devices. If the facility contains any continuous high bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices, continuous low bleed natural
[[Page 50417]]
gas pneumatic devices, or intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic
devices, then you must report the information specified in paragraphs
(b)(1) through (5) of this section, as applicable. You must report the
information specified in paragraphs (b)(1) through (5) of this section,
as applicable, for each well-pad (for onshore petroleum and natural gas
production), each gathering and boosting site (for onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting), or facility (for all other
applicable industry segments).
(1) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only).
(2) The number of natural gas pneumatic devices as specified in
paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (vii) of this section, as applicable. If a
natural gas pneumatic device was vented directly to the atmosphere for
part of the year and routed to a flare, combustion unit, or vapor
recovery system during another part of the year, then include the
device in each of the applicable counts specified in paragraphs
(b)(2)(ii) through (vii) of this section.
(i) The total number of natural gas pneumatic devices of each type
(continuous low bleed, continuous high bleed, and intermittent bleed),
determined according to Sec. 98.233(a)(4) through (6).
(ii) The total number of natural gas pneumatic devices of each type
(continuous low bleed, continuous high bleed, and intermittent bleed)
vented directly to the atmosphere, determined according to Sec.
98.233(a)(4) through (6).
(iii) The total number of natural gas pneumatic devices of each
type (continuous low bleed, continuous high bleed, and intermittent
bleed) routed to a flare, combustion, or vapor recovery system.
(iv) The total number of natural gas pneumatic devices of each type
(continuous low bleed, continuous high bleed, and intermittent bleed)
vented directly to the atmosphere for which emissions were calculated
using Calculation Method 1 according to Sec. 98.233(a)(1).
(v) The total number of natural gas pneumatic devices of each type
(continuous low bleed, continuous high bleed, and intermittent bleed)
vented directly to the atmosphere for which emissions were calculated
using Calculation Method 2 according to Sec. 98.233(a)(2).
(vi) The total number of natural gas pneumatic devices of each type
(continuous low bleed, continuous high bleed, and intermittent bleed)
vented directly to the atmosphere for which emissions were calculated
using Calculation Method 3 according to Sec. 98.233(a)(3).
(vii) If the reported values in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (vi)
of this section are estimated values determined according to Sec.
98.233(a)(5), then you must report the information specified in
paragraphs (b)(2)(vii)(A) through (C) of this section.
(A) The number of natural gas pneumatic devices of each type
reported in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (vi) of this section that are
counted.
(B) The number of natural gas pneumatic devices of each type
reported in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (vi) of this section that are
estimated (not counted).
(C) Whether the calendar year is the first calendar year of
reporting or the second calendar year of reporting.
(3) For natural gas pneumatic devices for which emissions were
calculated using Calculation Method 1 according to Sec. 98.233(a)(1),
report the information in paragraphs (b)(3)(i) through (vi) of this
section for each measurement location.
(i) Unique measurement location identification number.
(ii) Type of flow monitor (volumetric flow monitor; mass flow
monitor).
(iii) Number of natural gas pneumatic devices of each type
(continuous low bleed, continuous high bleed, and intermittent bleed)
downstream of the flow monitor.
(iv) An indication of whether a natural gas driven pneumatic pump
is also downstream of the flow monitor.
(v) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons CO2,
for the natural gas pneumatic devices calculated according to Sec.
98.233(a)(1) for the measurement location.
(vi) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons
CH4, for the natural gas pneumatic devices calculated
according to Sec. 98.233(a)(1) for the measurement location.
(4) If you used Calculation Method 2 according to Sec.
98.233(a)(2), report the information in paragraphs (b)(4)(i) through
(vii) of this section, as applicable.
(i) The number of years used in the current measurement cycle.
(ii) For onshore petroleum and natural gas production and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting facilities:
(A) Indicate whether the emissions from the natural gas pneumatic
devices at this well-pad or gathering and boosting site, as applicable,
were measured during the reporting year or if the emissions were
calculated using Equation W-1B.
(B) If the natural gas pneumatic devices at this well-pad or
gathering and boosting site, as applicable, were measured during the
reporting year, indicate the primary measurement method used (temporary
flow meter, calibrated bagging, or high volume sampler).
(C) If the emissions from natural gas pneumatic devices at this
well-pad or gathering and boosting site, as applicable, were calculated
using Equation W-1B, report the following information for each type of
natural gas pneumatic device (continuous low bleed, continuous high
bleed, and intermittent bleed).
(1) The value of the emissions factor for the reporting year as
calculated using Equation W-1A (in scf/hour/device).
(2) The total number of natural gas pneumatic devices measured
across all years upon which the emission factor is based (i.e., the
cumulative value of ``Sy=1n Countt,y'' in Equation W-1A of
this subpart).
(3) Total number of natural gas pneumatic devices that vent
directly to the atmosphere and that were not directly measured
according to the requirements in Sec. 98.233(a)(1) or (a)(2)(iii)
(i.e., ``Countt'' in Equation W-1B).
(4) The average estimated number of hours in the operating year the
natural gas pneumatic devices were in service (i.e., supplied with
natural gas) (``Tt'' in Equation W-1B of this subpart).
(iii) For onshore natural gas processing facilities, onshore
natural gas transmission compression facilities, underground natural
gas storage facilities, and natural gas distribution facilities:
(A) Indicate the primary measurement method used (temporary flow
meter, calibrated bagging, or high volume sampler) to measure the
emissions from natural gas pneumatic devices at this facility.
(B) Indicate whether the emissions from any natural gas pneumatic
devices at this facility were calculated using Equation W-1B.
(C) If the emissions from any natural gas pneumatic devices at this
facility were calculated using Equation W-1B, report the following
information for each type of natural gas pneumatic device (continuous
low bleed, continuous high bleed, and intermittent bleed).
(1) The value of the emission factor for the reporting year as
calculated using Equation W-1A (in scf/hour/device).
[[Page 50418]]
(2) The total number of natural gas pneumatic devices measured
across all years upon which the emission factor is based (i.e., the
cumulative value of ``Sy=1n Countt,y'' in Equation W-1A of
this subpart).
(3) Total number of natural gas pneumatic devices that vent
directly to the atmosphere and that were not directly measured
according to the requirements in Sec. 98.233(a)(1) or (a)(2)(iii)
(i.e., ``Countt'' in Equation W-1B of this subpart).
(4) The average estimated number of hours in the operating year the
natural gas pneumatic devices were in service (i.e., supplied with
natural gas) (``Tt'' in Equation W-1B of this subpart).
(iv) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons
CO2, cumulative by type of natural gas pneumatic device for
which emissions were directly measured and calculated as specified in
Sec. 98.233(a)(2)(iii) through (viii). Enter 0 if the natural gas
pneumatic devices at this well-pad or gathering and boosting were not
monitored during the reporting year.
(v) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons CH4,
cumulative by type of natural gas pneumatic device for which emissions
were directly measured and calculated as specified in Sec.
98.233(a)(2)(iii) through (viii). Enter 0 if the devices at this well-
pad or gathering and boosting were not monitored during the reporting
year.
(vi) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons
CO2, cumulative by type of natural gas pneumatic device for
which emissions were calculated according to Sec. 98.233(a)(2)(ix).
Enter 0 if all devices at this well-pad, gathering and boosting site,
or facility were monitored during the reporting year.
(vii) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons
CH4, cumulative by type of natural gas pneumatic device for
which emissions were calculated according to Sec. 98.233(a)(2)(ix).
Enter 0 if all devices at this well-pad, gathering and boosting site,
or facility were monitored during the reporting year.
(5) If you used Calculation Method 3 according to Sec.
98.233(a)(3), report the information in paragraphs (b)(5)(i) through
(vi) of this section.
(i) For continuous high bleed and continuous low bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices:
(A) Indicate whether you measured emissions according to Sec.
98.233(a)(3)(i)(A) or used default emission factors according to Sec.
98.233(a)(3)(i)(B) to calculate emissions from your continuous high
bleed and continuous low bleed natural gas pneumatic devices vented
directly to the atmosphere at this well-pad, gathering and boosting
site, or facility, as applicable.
(B) If measurements were made according to Sec.
98.233(a)(3)(i)(A), indicate the primary measurement method used
(temporary flow meter, calibrated bagging, or high volume sampler).
(C) If default emission factors were used according to Sec.
98.233(a)(3)(i)(B) to calculate emissions, report the following
information for each type of applicable natural gas pneumatic device
(continuous low bleed and continuous high bleed).
(1) Total number of natural gas pneumatic devices that vent
directly to the atmosphere and that were not directly measured
according to the requirements in Sec. 98.233(a)(1) or (a)(2)(iii)
(``Countt'' in Equation W-1B of this subpart).
(2) The average estimated number of hours in the operating year
that the natural gas pneumatic devices were in service (i.e., supplied
with natural gas) (``Tt'' in Equation W-1B of this subpart).
(ii) The number of years used in the current monitoring cycle for
intermittent bleed pneumatic devices.
(iii) For intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic devices at
onshore petroleum and natural gas production and onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting facilities:
(A) Indicate whether the emissions from intermittent bleed natural
gas pneumatic devices at this well-pad or gathering and boosting site,
as applicable, were monitored during the reporting year and calculated
using Equation W-1C of this subpart or if the emissions were calculated
using Equation W-1D of this subpart.
(B) If the natural gas pneumatic devices at this well-pad or
gathering and boosting site, as applicable, were monitored during the
reporting year, indicate the primary monitoring method used (OGI;
Method 21 at 10,000 ppm; Method 21 at 500 ppm; or infrared laser beam)
and the number of complete monitoring surveys conducted at the well-pad
or gathering and boosting site.
(C) If the emissions from intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic
devices at this well-pad or gathering and boosting site, as applicable,
were calculated using Equation W-1C of this subpart, report the
following information:
(1) The total number of intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic
devices detected as malfunctioning in any pneumatic device monitoring
survey during the calendar year (``x'' in Equation W-1C of this
subpart).
(2) Average time the intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic
devices were in service (i.e., supplied with natural gas) and assumed
to be malfunctioning in the calendar year (average value of
``Tm.z'' in Equation W-1C of this subpart).
(3) The total number of intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic
devices that were monitored but were not detected as malfunctioning in
any pneumatic device monitoring survey during the calendar year
(``Count'' in Equation W-1C of this subpart).
(4) Average time the intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic
devices that were monitored but were not detected as malfunctioning in
any pneumatic device monitoring survey during the calendar year were in
service (i.e., supplied with natural gas) during the calendar year
(``Tavg'' in Equation W-1C of this subpart).
(D) If the emissions from intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic
devices at this well-pad or gathering and boosting site, as applicable,
were calculated using Equation W-1D of this subpart, report the
following information:
(1) Total number of intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic
devices that were not surveyed during the year at the well-pad or
gathering and boosting site (``CountC'' in Equation W-1D of
this subpart as applied to the well-pad or gathering and boosting
site).
(2) Total number the number of unique intermittent bleed natural
gas pneumatic devices vented directly to the atmosphere facility-wide
that were monitored during the reporting year and identified as
malfunctioning as determined according to Sec. 98.233(a)(3)(iv)(B)
(``CountB'' in Equation W-1D of this subpart).
(3) Total number the number of unique intermittent bleed natural
gas pneumatic devices vented directly to the atmosphere facility-wide
that were monitored during the reporting year as determined according
to Sec. 98.233(a)(3)(iv)(A) (``CountA'' in Equation W-1D of
this subpart).
(4) Average time, in hours, the intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices that were not monitored but during the calendar year
were in service (i.e., supplied with natural gas) during the calendar
year (``Tavg'' in Equation W-1D of this subpart).
(iv) For intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic devices at
onshore natural gas processing facilities, onshore natural gas
transmission compression facilities, underground natural gas storage
facilities, and natural gas distribution facilities:
(A) Indicate the primary monitoring method used (OGI; Method 21 at
10,000 ppm; Method 21 at 500 ppm, or infrared laser beam) and the
number of complete
[[Page 50419]]
monitoring surveys conducted at the facility.
(B) The total number of intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic
devices detected as malfunctioning in any pneumatic device monitoring
survey during the calendar year (``x'' in Equation W-1C of this
subpart).
(C) Average time the intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic
devices were in service (i.e., supplied with natural gas) and assumed
to be malfunctioning in the calendar year (average value of
``Tm,z'' in Equation W-1C of this subpart).
(D) The total number of intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic
devices that were monitored but were not detected as malfunctioning in
any pneumatic device monitoring survey during the calendar year
(``Count'' in Equation W-1C of this subpart).
(E) Average time the intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic
devices that were monitored but were not detected as malfunctioning in
any pneumatic device monitoring survey during the calendar year were in
service (i.e., supplied with natural gas) during the calendar year
(``Tavg'' in Equation W-1C of this subpart).
(F) If the emissions from some of the intermittent bleed natural
gas pneumatic devices at this facility were calculated using Equation
W-1D of this subpart, report the following information:
(1) Total number of intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic
devices that were not surveyed during the year at the facility
(``CountC'' in Equation W-1D of this subpart).
(2) Total number of unique intermittent bleed natural gas pneumatic
devices vented directly to the atmosphere facility-wide that were
monitored during the reporting year and identified as malfunctioning as
determined according to Sec. 98.233(a)(3)(iv)(B)
(``CountB'' in Equation W-1D of this subpart).
(3) Total number the number of unique intermittent bleed natural
gas pneumatic devices vented directly to the atmosphere facility-wide
that were monitored during the reporting year as determined according
to Sec. 98.233(a)(3)(iv)(A) (``CountA'' in Equation W-1D of
this subpart).
(4) Average time, in hours, the intermittent bleed natural gas
pneumatic devices that were not monitored but during the calendar year
were in service (i.e., supplied with natural gas) during the calendar
year (``Tavg'' in Equation W-1D of this subpart).
(v) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons CO2,
for each type of natural gas pneumatic device calculated according to
Calculation Method 3 in Sec. 98.233(a)(3).
(vi) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons
CH4, for each type of natural gas pneumatic device
calculated according to Calculation Method 3 in Sec. 98.233(a)(3).
(c) Natural gas driven pneumatic pumps. You must indicate whether
the facility has any natural gas driven pneumatic pumps. If the
facility contains any natural gas driven pneumatic pumps, then you must
report the information specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (7) of
this section. If a pump was vented directly to the atmosphere for part
of the year and routed to a flare, combustion, or vapor recovery system
during another part of the year, then include the pump in each of the
counts specified in paragraphs (c)(2) through (4) of this section. You
must report the information specified in paragraphs (c)(1) through (7)
of this section, as applicable, for each well-pad (for onshore
petroleum and natural gas production) and each gathering and boosting
site (for onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting).
(1) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only).
(2) The number of natural gas driven pneumatic pumps as specified
in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (vi) of this section, as applicable. If
a natural gas driven pneumatic pump was vented directly to the
atmosphere for part of the year and routed to a flare, combustion unit,
or vapor recovery system during another part of the year, then include
the device in each of the applicable counts specified in paragraphs
(c)(2)(ii) through (vi) of this section.
(i) Count of natural gas driven pneumatic pumps.
(ii) Count of natural gas driven pneumatic pumps vented directly to
the atmosphere at any point during the year.
(iii) Count of natural gas driven pneumatic pumps routed to a
flare, combustion, or vapor recovery system at any point during the
year.
(iv) Count of natural gas driven pneumatic pumps vented directly to
the atmosphere for which emissions were calculated using Calculation
Method 1 according to Sec. 98.233(c)(1).
(v) Count of natural gas driven pneumatic pumps vented directly to
the atmosphere for which emissions were calculated using Calculation
Method 2 according to Sec. 98.233(c)(2).
(vi) Count of natural gas driven pneumatic pumps vented directly to
the atmosphere for which emissions were calculated using Calculation
Method 3 according to Sec. 98.233(c)(3).
(3) For natural gas driven pneumatic pumps for which emissions were
calculated using Calculation Method 1 according to Sec. 98.233(c)(1),
report the information in paragraphs (c)(3)(i) through (vi) of this
section for each measurement location.
(i) Unique measurement location identification number.
(ii) Type of flow monitor (volumetric flow monitor; mass flow
monitor).
(iii) Number of natural gas driven pneumatic pumps downstream of
the flow monitor.
(iv) An indication of whether any natural gas pneumatic devices are
also downstream of the monitoring location.
(v) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons CO2,
for the pneumatic pump(s) calculated according to Sec. 98.233(c)(1)
for the measurement location.
(vi) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons
CH4, for the pneumatic pump(s) calculated according to Sec.
98.233(c)(1) for the measurement location.
(4) If you used Calculation Method 2 according to Sec.
98.233(c)(2), report the information in paragraphs (c)(4)(i) through
(vi) of this section, as applicable.
(i) The number of years used in the current measurement cycle.
(ii) Indicate whether the emissions from the pneumatic pumps at
this well-pad or gathering and boosting site, as applicable, were
measured during the reporting year or if the emissions were calculated
using Equation W-2C.
(A) If the pneumatic pumps at this well-pad or gathering and
boosting site, as applicable, were measured during the reporting year,
indicate the primary measurement method used (temporary flow meter,
calibrated bagging, or high volume sampler).
(B) If the emissions from pneumatic pumps at this well-pad or
gathering and boosting site, as applicable, were calculated using
Equation W-2C, report the following information:
(1) The value of the emissions factor for the reporting year as
calculated using Equation W-2B (in scf/hour/pump).
(2) The total number of pumps measured across all years upon which
the emission factor is based (i.e., the cumulative value of
``Sny=1 County'' term used in Equation W-2B).
(3) Total number of natural gas driven pneumatic pumps that vent
directly to the atmosphere and that were not directly measured
according to the requirements in Sec. 98.233(c)(1) or (c)(2)(iii)
(i.e., ``Count'' in Equation W-2B).
[[Page 50420]]
(4) The average estimated number of hours in the operating year the
pumps were pumping liquid (i.e., ``T'' in Equation W-2C).
(iii) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons
CO2, cumulative for all natural gas driven pneumatic pumps
for which emissions were directly measured and calculated as specified
in Sec. 98.233(c)(2)(ii) through (vi). Enter 0 if emissions from none
of the natural gas driven pneumatic pumps at this well-pad or gathering
and boosting site were measured during the reporting year.
(iv) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons
CH4, cumulative for all natural gas driven pneumatic pumps
for which emissions were directly measured and calculated as specified
in Sec. 98.233(c)(2)(ii) through (vi). Enter 0 if emissions from none
of the natural gas driven pneumatic pumps at this well-pad or gathering
and boosting site were measured during the reporting year.
(v) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons CO2,
cumulative for all natural gas driven pneumatic pumps for which
emissions were calculated according to Sec. 98.233(c)(2)(vii)(B)
through (D). Enter 0 if emissions from all natural gas driven pneumatic
pumps at this well-pad or gathering and boosting site were measured
during the reporting year.
(vi) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons
CH4, cumulative for all natural gas driven pneumatic pumps
for which emissions were calculated according to Sec.
98.233(c)(2)(vii)(B) through (D). Enter 0 if emissions from all natural
gas driven pneumatic pumps at this well-pad or gathering and boosting
site were measured during the reporting year.
(5) If you used Calculation Method 3 according to Sec.
98.233(c)(3), report the information in paragraphs (c)(5)(i) through
(iii) of this section for the natural gas driven pneumatic pumps
subject to Calculation Method 3.
(i) Average estimated number of hours in the calendar year that
natural gas driven pneumatic pumps that vented directly to atmosphere
were pumping liquid (``T'' in Equation W-2C of this subpart).
(ii) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons
CO2, for all natural gas driven pneumatic pumps vented
directly to the atmosphere combined, calculated according to Sec.
98.233(c)(3).
(iii) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons
CH4, for all natural gas driven pneumatic pumps vented
directly to the atmosphere combined, calculated according to Sec.
98.233(c)(3).
(d) Acid gas removal units and nitrogen removal units. You must
indicate whether your facility has any acid gas removal units or
nitrogen removal units that vent directly to the atmosphere, to a flare
or engine, or to a sulfur recovery plant. For any acid gas removal
units or nitrogen removal units that vent directly to the atmosphere or
to a sulfur recovery plant, you must report the information specified
in paragraphs (d)(1) and (2) of this section. For acid gas removal
units or nitrogen removal units that were routed to a flare or routed
to an engine for the entire year, you must only report the information
specified in paragraph (d)(1)(i) through (iv) and (x) of this section.
(1) You must report the information specified in paragraphs
(d)(1)(i) through (x) of this section for each acid gas removal unit or
nitrogen removal unit, as applicable.
(i) A unique name or ID number for the acid gas removal unit or
nitrogen removal unit. For the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production and the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting industry segments, a different name or ID may be used for a
single acid gas removal unit or nitrogen removal unit for each location
it operates at in a given year.
(ii) Whether the acid gas removal unit or nitrogen removal unit
vent was routed to a flare, and if so, whether it was routed for the
entire year or only part of the year.
(iii) Whether the acid gas removal unit or nitrogen removal unit
vent was routed to combustion, and if so, whether it was routed for the
entire year or only part of the year.
(iv) Total feed rate entering the acid gas removal unit or nitrogen
removal unit, using a meter or engineering estimate based on process
knowledge or best available data, in million standard cubic feet per
year.
(v) If the acid gas removal unit or nitrogen removal unit was
routed to a flare or to combustion for only part of the year, the feed
rate entering the acid gas removal unit or nitrogen removal unit during
the portion of the year that the emissions were vented directly to the
atmosphere, using a meter or engineering estimate based on process
knowledge or best available data, in million standard cubic feet per
year.
(vi) The calculation method used to calculate CO2 and
CH4 emissions from the acid gas removal unit or to calculate
CH4 emissions from the nitrogen removal unit, as specified
in Sec. 98.233(d).
(vii) Whether any CO2 emissions from the acid gas
removal unit are recovered and transferred outside the facility, as
specified in Sec. 98.233(d)(11). If any CO2 emissions from
the acid gas removal unit were recovered and transferred outside the
facility, then you must report the annual quantity of CO2,
in metric tons CO2, that was recovered and transferred
outside the facility under subpart PP of this part.
(viii) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons
CO2, vented directly to the atmosphere from the acid gas
removal unit, calculated using any one of the calculation methods
specified in Sec. 98.233(d) and as specified in Sec. 98.233(d)(10)
and (11).
(ix) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons
CH4, vented directly to the atmosphere from the acid gas
removal unit or nitrogen removal unit, calculated using any one of the
calculation methods specified in Sec. 98.233(d) and as specified in
Sec. 98.233(d)(10) and (11).
(x) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only).
(2) You must report information specified in paragraphs (d)(2)(i)
through (iii) of this section, applicable to the calculation method
reported in paragraph (d)(1)(iii) of this section, for each acid gas
removal unit or nitrogen removal unit.
(i) If you used Calculation Method 1 or Calculation Method 2 as
specified in Sec. 98.233(d) to calculate CO2 emissions from
the acid gas removal unit and Calculation Method 2 as specified in
Sec. 98.233(d) to calculate CH4 emissions from the acid gas
removal unit or nitrogen removal unit, then you must report the
information specified in paragraphs (d)(2)(i)(A) through (C) of this
section, as applicable.
(A) Annual average volumetric fraction of CO2 in the
vent gas exiting the acid gas removal unit.
(B) Annual average volumetric fraction of CH4 in the
vent gas exiting the acid gas removal unit or nitrogen removal unit.
(C) Annual volume of gas vented from the acid gas removal unit or
nitrogen removal unit, in cubic feet.
(D) The temperature that corresponds to the reported annual volume
of gas vented from the unit, in degrees Fahrenheit. If the annual
volume of gas vented is reported in actual cubic feet, report the
actual temperature; if it is reported in standard cubic feet, report 60
[deg]F.
(E) The pressure that corresponds to the reported annual volume of
gas vented from the unit, in pounds per square inch absolute. If the
annual volume of gas vented is reported in actual cubic feet, report
the actual pressure; if it is reported in standard cubic feet, report
14.7 psia.
(ii) If you used Calculation Method 3 as specified in Sec.
98.233(d) to calculate
[[Page 50421]]
CO2 or CH4 emissions from the acid gas removal
unit or nitrogen removal unit, then you must report the information
specified in paragraphs (d)(2)(ii)(A) through (M) of this section, as
applicable depending on the equation used.
(A) Indicate which equation was used (Equation W-4A, W-4B, or W-
4C).
(B) Annual average volumetric fraction of CO2 in the
natural gas flowing out of the acid gas removal unit, as specified in
Equation W-4A, Equation W-4B, or Equation W-4C of this subpart.
(C) Annual average volumetric fraction of CO2 content in
natural gas flowing into the acid gas removal unit, as specified in
Equation W-4A, Equation W-4B, or Equation W-4C of this subpart.
(D) Annual average volumetric fraction of CO2 in the
vent gas exiting the acid gas removal unit, as specified in Equation W-
4A or Equation W-4B of this subpart.
(E) Annual average volumetric fraction of CH4 in the
natural gas flowing out of the acid gas removal unit or nitrogen
removal unit, as specified in Equation W-4A, Equation W-4B, or Equation
W-4C of this subpart.
(F) Annual average volumetric fraction of CH4 content in
natural gas flowing into the acid gas removal unit or nitrogen removal
unit, as specified in Equation W-4A, Equation W-4B, or Equation W-4C of
this subpart.
(G) Annual average volumetric fraction of CH4 in the
vent gas exiting the acid gas removal unit or nitrogen removal unit, as
specified in Equation W-4A or Equation W-4B of this subpart.
(H) The total annual volume of natural gas flow into the acid gas
removal unit or nitrogen removal unit, as specified in Equation W-4A or
Equation W-4C of this subpart, in cubic feet at actual conditions.
(I) The temperature that corresponds to the reported total annual
volume of natural gas flow into the acid gas removal unit or nitrogen
removal unit, as specified in Equation W-4A or Equation W-4C of this
subpart, in degrees Fahrenheit. If the total annual volume of natural
gas flow is reported in actual cubic feet, report the actual
temperature; if it is reported in standard cubic feet, report 60
[deg]F.
(J) The pressure that corresponds to the reported total annual
volume of natural gas flow into the acid gas removal unit or nitrogen
removal unit, as specified in Equation W-4A or Equation W-4C of this
subpart, in pounds per square inch absolute. If the total annual volume
of natural gas flow is reported in actual cubic feet, report the actual
pressure; if it is reported in standard cubic feet, report 14.7 psia.
(K) The total annual volume of natural gas flow out of the acid gas
removal unit or nitrogen removal unit, as specified in Equation W-4B or
Equation W-4C of this subpart, in cubic feet at actual conditions.
(L) The temperature that corresponds to the reported total annual
volume of natural gas flow out of the acid gas removal unit or nitrogen
removal unit, as specified in Equation W-4B or Equation W-4C of this
subpart, in degrees Fahrenheit. If the total annual volume of natural
gas flow is reported in actual cubic feet, report the actual
temperature; if it is reported in standard cubic feet, report 60
[deg]F.
(M) The pressure that corresponds to the reported total annual
volume of natural gas flow out of the acid gas removal unit or nitrogen
removal unit, as specified in Equation W-4B or Equation W-4C of this
subpart, in pounds per square inch absolute. If the total annual volume
of natural gas flow is reported in actual cubic feet, report the actual
pressure; if it is reported in standard cubic feet, report 14.7 psia.
(iii) If you used Calculation Method 4 as specified in Sec.
98.233(d) to calculate CO2 or CH4 emissions from
the acid gas removal unit or nitrogen removal unit, then you must
report the information specified in paragraphs (d)(2)(iii)(A) through
(N) of this section, as applicable to the simulation software package
used.
(A) The name of the simulation software package used.
(B) Annual average natural gas feed temperature, in degrees
Fahrenheit.
(C) Annual average natural gas feed pressure, in pounds per square
inch.
(D) Annual average natural gas feed flow rate, in standard cubic
feet per minute.
(E) Annual average acid gas content of the feed natural gas, in
mole percent.
(F) Annual average acid gas content of the outlet natural gas, in
mole percent.
(G) Annual average methane content of the feed natural gas, in mole
percent.
(H) Annual average methane content of the outlet natural gas, in
mole percent.
(I) Total annual unit operating hours, excluding downtime for
maintenance or standby, in hours per year.
(J) Annual average exit temperature of the natural gas, in degrees
Fahrenheit.
(K) Annual average solvent pressure, in pounds per square inch.
(L) Annual average solvent temperature, in degrees Fahrenheit.
(M) Annual average solvent circulation rate, in gallons per minute.
(N) Solvent type used for the majority of the year, from one of the
following options: SelexolTM, Rectisol[supreg],
PurisolTM, Fluor Solvent, BenfieldTM, 20 wt% MEA,
30 wt% MEA, 40 wt% MDEA, 50 wt% MDEA, and other (specify).
(e) Dehydrators. You must indicate whether your facility contains
any of the following equipment: Glycol dehydrators for which you
calculated emissions using Calculation Method 1 according to Sec.
98.233(e)(1), glycol dehydrators for which you calculated emissions
using Calculation Method 2 according to Sec. 98.233(e)(2), and
dehydrators that use desiccant. If your facility contains any of the
equipment listed in this paragraph (e), then you must report the
applicable information in paragraphs (e)(1) through (3) of this
section.
(1) For each glycol dehydrator for which you calculated emissions
using Calculation Method 1 (as specified in Sec. 98.233(e)(1)), you
must report the information specified in paragraphs (e)(1)(i) through
(xviii) of this section for the dehydrator.
(i) A unique name or ID number for the dehydrator. For the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production and the onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting industry segments, a different name
or ID may be used for a single dehydrator for each location it operates
at in a given year.
(ii) Annual average dehydrator feed natural gas flow rate, in
million standard cubic feet per day.
(iii) Annual average dehydrator feed natural gas water content, in
pounds per million standard cubic feet.
(iv) Annual average dehydrator outlet natural gas water content, in
pounds per million standard cubic feet.
(v) Dehydrator absorbent circulation pump type (e.g., natural gas
pneumatic, air pneumatic, or electric).
(vi) Annual average dehydrator absorbent circulation rate, in
gallons per minute.
(vii) Type of absorbent (e.g., triethylene glycol (TEG), diethylene
glycol (DEG), or ethylene glycol (EG)).
(viii) Whether stripping gas is used in dehydrator.
(ix) Whether a flash tank separator is used in dehydrator.
(x) Total time the dehydrator is operating during the year, in
hours.
(xi) Annual average temperature of the wet natural gas at the
absorber inlet, in degrees Fahrenheit.
(xii) Annual average pressure of the wet natural gas at the
absorber inlet, in pounds per square inch gauge.
(xiii) Annual average mole fraction of CH4 in wet
natural gas.
(xiv) Annual average mole fraction of CO2 in wet natural
gas.
(xv) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production
[[Page 50422]]
industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID (for the
onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting industry
segment only).(xvi) If a flash tank separator is used in the
dehydrator, then you must report the information specified in
paragraphs (e)(1)(xvi)(A) through (F) of this section for the emissions
from the flash tank vent, as applicable. If flash tank emissions were
routed to a regenerator firebox/fire tubes, then you must also report
the information specified in paragraphs (e)(1)(xvi)(G) through (I) of
this section for the combusted emissions from the flash tank vent.
(A) Whether any flash gas emissions are vented directly to the
atmosphere, routed to a flare, routed to the regenerator firebox/fire
tubes, routed to a vapor recovery system, used as stripping gas, or any
combination.
(B) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons CO2,
from the flash tank when not routed to a flare or regenerator firebox/
fire tubes, calculated according to Sec. 98.233(e)(1) and, if
applicable, (e)(4).
(C) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons CH4,
from the flash tank when not routed to a flare or regenerator firebox/
fire tubes, calculated according to Sec. 98.233(e)(1) and, if
applicable, (e)(4).
(D) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons CO2,
that resulted from routing flash gas to a regenerator firebox/fire
tubes, calculated according to Sec. 98.233(e)(5).
(E) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons CH4,
that resulted from routing flash gas to a regenerator firebox/fire
tubes, calculated according to Sec. 98.233(e)(5).
(F) Annual N2O emissions, in metric tons N2O,
that resulted from routing flash gas to a regenerator firebox/fire
tubes, calculated according to Sec. 98.233(e)(5).
(G) Indicate whether the regenerator firebox/fire tubes was
monitored with a CEMS. If a CEMS was used, then paragraphs
(e)(1)(xvi)(E) and (F) and (e)(1)(xvi)(H) and (I) of this section do
not apply.
(H) Total volume of gas from the flash tank to a regenerator
firebox/fire tubes, in standard cubic feet.
(I) Average combustion efficiency, expressed as a fraction of gas
from the flash tank combusted by a burning regenerator firebox/fire
tubes.
(xvii) Report the information specified in paragraphs
(e)(1)(xvii)(A) through (F) of this section for the emissions from the
still vent, as applicable. If still vent emissions were routed to a
regenerator firebox/fire tubes, then you must also report the
information specified in paragraphs (e)(1)(xvii)(G) through (I) of this
section for the combusted emissions from the still vent.
(A) Whether any still vent emissions are vented directly to the
atmosphere, routed to a flare, routed to the regenerator firebox/fire
tubes, routed to a vapor recovery system, used as stripping gas, or any
combination.
(B) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons CO2,
from the still vent when not routed to a flare or regenerator firebox/
fire tubes, calculated according to Sec. 98.233(e)(1), and, if
applicable, (e)(4).
(C) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons CH4,
from the still vent when not routed to a flare or regenerator firebox/
fire tubes, calculated according to Sec. 98.233(e)(1) and, if
applicable, (e)(4).
(D) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons CO2,
that resulted from routing still vent gas to a regenerator firebox/fire
tubes, calculated according to Sec. [thinsp]98.233(e)(5).
(E) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons CH4,
that resulted from routing still vent gas to a regenerator firebox/fire
tubes, calculated according to Sec. [thinsp]98.233(e)(5).
(F) Annual N2O emissions, in metric tons N2O,
that resulted from routing still vent gas to a regenerator firebox/fire
tubes, calculated according to Sec. [thinsp]98.233(e)(5).
(G) Indicate whether the regenerator firebox/fire tubes was
monitored with a CEMS. If a CEMS was used, then paragraphs
(e)(1)(xvii)(E) and (F) and (e)(1)(xvii)(H) and (I) of this section do
not apply.
(H) Total volume of gas from the still vent to a regenerator
firebox/fire tubes, in standard cubic feet.
(I) Average combustion efficiency, expressed as a fraction of gas
from the still vent combusted by a burning regenerator firebox/fire
tubes.
(xviii) Name of the software package used.
(2) You must report the information specified in paragraphs
(e)(2)(i) through (vi) of this section for all glycol dehydrators with
an annual average daily natural gas throughput greater than 0 million
standard cubic feet per day and less than 0.4 million standard cubic
feet per day for which you calculated emissions using Calculation
Method 2 (as specified in Sec. 98.233(e)(2)) at the facility, well-
pad, or gathering and boosting site.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only).
(ii) The total number of dehydrators at the facility, well-pad, or
gathering and boosting site for which you calculated emissions using
Calculation Method 2.
(iii) Whether any dehydrator emissions were routed to a vapor
recovery system. If any dehydrator emissions were routed to a vapor
recovery system, then you must report the total number of dehydrators
at the facility that routed to a vapor recovery system.
(iv) Whether any dehydrator emissions were routed to a control
device that reduces CO2 and/or CH4 emissions
other than a vapor recovery system or a flare or regenerator firebox/
fire tubes. If any dehydrator emissions were routed to a control device
that reduces CO2 and/or CH4 emissions other than
a vapor recovery system or a flare or regenerator firebox/fire tubes,
then you must specify the type of control device(s) and the total
number of dehydrators at the facility that were routed to each type of
control device.
(v) Whether any dehydrator emissions were routed to a flare or
regenerator firebox/fire tubes. If any dehydrator emissions were routed
to a flare or regenerator firebox/fire tubes, then you must report the
information specified in paragraphs (e)(2)(v)(A) through (E) of this
section.
(A) The total number of dehydrators routed to a flare and the total
number of dehydrators routed to regenerator firebox/fire tubes.
(B) Total volume of gas from the flash tank to a regenerator
firebox/fire tubes, in standard cubic feet.
(C) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons CO2,
for the dehydrators routed to a regenerator firebox/fire tubes reported
in paragraph (e)(2)(v)(A) of this section, calculated according to
Sec. 98.233(e)(5).
(D) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons CH4,
for the dehydrators routed to a regenerator firebox/fire tubes reported
in paragraph (e)(2)(v)(A) of this section, calculated according to
Sec. 98.233(e)(5).
(E) Annual N2O emissions, in metric tons N2O,
for the dehydrators routed to a regenerator firebox/fire tubes reported
in paragraph (e)(2)(v)(A) of this section, calculated according to
Sec. 98.233(e)(5).
(vi) For dehydrator emissions that were not routed to a flare or
regenerator firebox/fire tubes, report the information specified in
paragraphs (e)(2)(vi)(A) and (B) of this section.
(A) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons CO2,
for emissions from all dehydrators reported in paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of
this section that were not routed to a flare or regenerator firebox/
fire tubes, calculated according to Sec. 98.233(e)(2) and, if
applicable, (e)(4), where emissions are added together for all such
dehydrators.
[[Page 50423]]
(B) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons CH4,
for emissions from all dehydrators reported in paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of
this section that were not routed to a flare or regenerator firebox/
fire tubes, calculated according to Sec. 98.233(e)(2) and, if
applicable, (e)(4), where emissions are added together for all such
dehydrators.
(3) For dehydrators that use desiccant (as specified in Sec.
98.233(e)(3)), you must report the information specified in paragraphs
(e)(3)(i) through (vi) of this section for the entire facility.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only).
(ii) Count of desiccant dehydrators that had one or more openings
during the calendar year at the facility, well-pad, or gathering and
boosting site for which you calculated emissions using Calculation
Method 3 as specified in paragraphs (e)(3)(ii)(A) through (C) of this
section.
(A) The total number of opened desiccant dehydrators.
(B) The number of opened desiccant dehydrators that used
deliquescing desiccant (e.g., calcium chloride or lithium chloride).
(C) The number of opened desiccant dehydrators that used
regenerative desiccant (e.g., molecular sieves, activated alumina, or
silica gel).
(iii) For desiccant dehydrators at the facility, well-pad, or
gathering and boosting site identified in paragraph (e)(3)(ii)(A) of
this section, total physical volume of all opened dehydrator vessels.
(iv) For desiccant dehydrators at the facility, well-pad, or
gathering and boosting site identified in paragraph (e)(3)(ii)(A) of
this section, total number of dehydrator openings in the calendar year.
(v) For desiccant dehydrators at the facility, well-pad, or
gathering and boosting site identified in paragraph (e)(3)(ii)(A) of
this section, whether any dehydrator emissions were routed to a vapor
recovery system. If any dehydrator emissions were routed to a vapor
recovery system, then you must report the total number of dehydrators
at the facility that routed to a vapor recovery system.
(vi) For desiccant dehydrators at the facility, well-pad, or
gathering and boosting site identified in paragraph (e)(3)(ii)(A) of
this section, whether any dehydrator emissions were routed to a control
device that reduces CO2 and/or CH4 emissions
other than a vapor recovery system or a flare or regenerator firebox/
fire tubes. If any dehydrator emissions were routed to a control device
that reduces CO2 and/or CH4 emissions other than
a vapor recovery system or a flare or regenerator firebox/fire tubes,
then you must specify the type of control device(s) and the total
number of dehydrators at the facility that were routed to each type of
control device.
(vii) For desiccant dehydrators at the facility, well-pad, or
gathering and boosting site identified in paragraph (e)(3)(ii)(A) of
this section, whether any dehydrator emissions were routed to a flare
or regenerator firebox/fire tubes. If any dehydrator emissions were
routed to a flare or regenerator firebox/fire tubes, then you must
report the information specified in paragraphs (e)(3)(vii)(A) through
(E) of this section.
(A) The total number of dehydrators routed to a flare and the total
number of dehydrators routed to regenerator firebox/fire tubes.
(B) Total volume of gas from the flash tank to a regenerator
firebox/fire tubes, in standard cubic feet.
(C) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons CO2,
for the dehydrators routed to a regenerator firebox/fire tubes reported
in paragraph (e)(3)(vii)(A) of this section, calculated according to
Sec. 98.233(e)(5).
(D) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons CH4,
for the dehydrators routed to a regenerator firebox/fire tubes reported
in paragraph (e)(3)(vii)(A) of this section, calculated according to
Sec. 98.233(e)(5).
(E) Annual N2O emissions, in metric tons N2O,
for the dehydrators routed to a regenerator firebox/fire tubes reported
in paragraph (e)(3)(vii)(A) of this section, calculated according to
Sec. 98.233(e)(5).
(viii) For desiccant dehydrators at the facility, well-pad, or
gathering and boosting site identified in paragraph (e)(3)(ii)(A) of
this section that were not routed to a flare or regenerator firebox/
fire tubes, report the information specified in paragraphs
(e)(3)(viii)(A) and (B) of this section.
(A) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons CO2,
for emissions from all desiccant dehydrators reported under paragraph
(e)(3)(ii) of this section that are not venting to a flare or
regenerator firebox/fire tubes, calculated according to Sec.
98.233(e)(3) and, if applicable, (e)(4), and summing for all such
dehydrators.
(B) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons CH4,
for emissions from all desiccant dehydrators reported in paragraph
(e)(3)(ii) of this section that are not venting to a flare or
regenerator firebox/fire tubes, calculated according to Sec.
98.233(e)(3), and, if applicable, (e)(4), and summing for all such
dehydrators.
(f) * * *
(1) For each well for which you used Calculation Method 1 to
calculate natural gas emissions from well venting for liquids
unloading, report the information specified in paragraphs (f)(1)(i)
through (xii) of this section. Report information separately for wells
by unloading type combination (with or without plunger lifts, automated
or manual unloading).
(i) Well ID number.
(ii) Well tubing diameter and pressure group ID.
(iii) Unloading type combination (with or without plunger lifts,
automated or manual unloading).
(iv) [Reserved]
(v) Indicate whether the monitoring period used to determine the
cumulative amount of time venting was not the full calendar year.
(vi) Cumulative amount of time the well was vented (``Tp'' from
Equation W-7A or W-7B of this subpart), in hours.
(vii) Cumulative number of unloadings vented directly to the
atmosphere for the well.
* * * * *
(xi) For each well tubing diameter group and pressure group
combination, you must report the information specified in paragraphs
(f)(1)(xi)(A) through (F) of this section for each individual well not
using a plunger lift that was tested during the year.
* * * * *
(F) Unloading type (automated or manual).
(xii) For each well tubing diameter group and pressure group
combination, you must report the information specified in paragraphs
(f)(1)(xii)(A) through (F) of this section for each individual well
using a plunger lift that was tested during the year.
* * * * *
(F) Unloading type (automated or manual).
(2) For each well for which you used Calculation Method 2 or 3 (as
specified in Sec. 93.233(f)) to calculate natural gas emissions from
well venting for liquids unloading, you must report the information in
paragraphs (f)(2)(i) through (xii) of this section. Report information
separately for each calculation method and unloading type combination
(with or without plunger lifts, automated or manual unloadings).
(i) Well ID number.
* * * * *
(iii) Unloading type combination (with or without plunger lifts,
automated or manual unloadings).
[[Page 50424]]
(iv) [Reserved]
(v) Cumulative number of unloadings vented directly to the
atmosphere for the well.
* * * * *
(ix) Average flow-line rate of gas (average of ``SFRp''
from Equation W-8 or W-9 of this subpart, as applicable), at standard
conditions in cubic feet per hour.
(x) Cumulative amount of time that wells were left open to the
atmosphere during unloading events (sum of ``HRp,q'' from
Equation W-8 or W-9 of this subpart, as applicable), in hours.
(xi) For each well without plunger lifts, the information in
paragraphs (f)(2)(xi)(A) through (D) of this section.
(A) Internal casing diameter (``CDp'' from Equation W-8
of this subpart), in inches.
(B) Well depth (``WDp'' from Equation W-8 of this
subpart), in feet.
(C) Shut-in pressure, surface pressure, or casing pressure
(``SPp'' from Equation W-8 of this subpart), in pounds per
square inch absolute.
(D) The most recent calendar year Calculation Method 1 was used to
calculate emissions from well venting for liquids unloading for wells
without plunger lifts of the same sub-basin, well tubing diameter group
and pressure group combination.
(xii) For wells with plunger lifts, the information in paragraphs
(f)(2)(xiii)(A) through (D) of this section.
(A) Internal tubing diameter (``TDp'' from Equation W-9
of this subpart), in inches.
(B) Tubing depth (``WDp'' from Equation W-9 of this
subpart), in feet.
(C) Flow line pressure (``SPp'' from Equation W-9 of
this subpart), in pounds per square inch absolute.
(D) The most recent calendar year Calculation Method 1 was used to
calculate emissions from well venting for liquids unloading for the
wells with plunger lifts in the same sub-basin, well tubing diameter
group and pressure group combination.
(g) Completions and workovers with hydraulic fracturing. You must
indicate whether your facility had any well completions or workovers
with hydraulic fracturing during the calendar year. If your facility
had well completions or workovers with hydraulic fracturing during the
calendar year that vented directly to the atmosphere, then you must
report information specified in paragraphs (g)(1) through (10) of this
section, for each well. If your facility had well completions or
workovers with hydraulic fracturing during the year that only routed to
flares, then you must report the information specified in paragraphs
(g)(1) through (3) of this section, for each well. Report information
separately for completions and workovers.
(1) Well ID number.
(2) Well type combination (horizontal or vertical, flared or
vented, reduced emission completion or not a reduced emission
completion, gas well or oil well).
(3) Number of completions or workovers for each well.
* * * * *
(5) * * *
(i) Cumulative gas flowback time, in hours, for all completions or
workovers at the well from when gas is first detected until sufficient
quantities are present to enable separation, and the cumulative
flowback time, in hours, after sufficient quantities of gas are present
to enable separation (sum of ``Tp,i'' and sum of
``Tp,s'' values used in Equation W-10A of Sec. 98.233). You
may delay the reporting of this data element if you indicate in the
annual report that the well is a wildcat well and/or delineation well
and the only wells in the same sub-basin and well type combination are
wildcat wells and/or delineation wells. If you elect to delay reporting
of this data element, you must report by the date specified in
paragraph (cc) of this section the total number of hours of flowback
from the well during completions or workovers.
(ii) If the well is a measured well for the sub-basin and well-type
combination, the flowback rate, in standard cubic feet per hour
(average of ``FRs,p'' values used in Equation W-12A of Sec.
98.233). You may delay the reporting of this data element if you
indicate in the annual report that the well is a wildcat well and/or
delineation well and the only wells that can be used for the
measurement in the same sub-basin and well type combination are wildcat
wells and/or delineation wells. If you elect to delay reporting of this
data element, you must report by the date specified in paragraph (cc)
of this section the measured flowback rate(s) during well completion or
workover for the well.
(iii) If you used Equation W-12C of Sec. 98.233 to calculate the
average gas production rate for an oil well, then you must report the
information specified in paragraphs (g)(6)(iii)(A) and (B) of this
section.
(A) Gas to oil ratio for the well in standard cubic feet of gas per
barrel of oil (``GORp'' in Equation W-12C of Sec. 98.233).
You may delay the reporting of this data element if you indicate in the
annual report that the well is a wildcat well and/or delineation well
and the only wells that can be used for the measurement in the same
sub-basin and well type combination are wildcat wells and/or
delineation wells. If you elect to delay reporting of this data
element, you must report by the date specified in paragraph (cc) of
this section the gas to oil ratio for the well.
(B) Volume of oil produced during the first 30 days of production
after completion of the newly drilled well or well workover using
hydraulic fracturing, in barrels (``Vp'' in Equation W-12C
of Sec. 98.233). You may delay the reporting of this data element if
you indicate in the annual report that the well is a wildcat well and/
or delineation well and the only wells that can be used for the
measurement in the same sub-basin and well type combination are wildcat
wells and/or delineation wells. If you elect to delay reporting of this
data element, you must report by the date specified in paragraph (cc)
of this section the volume of oil produced during the first 30 days of
production after well completion or workover for the well.
(6) If you used Equation W-10B of Sec. 98.233 to calculate annual
volumetric total gas emissions, then you must report the information
specified in paragraphs (g)(6)(i) and (ii) of this section.
(i) Vented natural gas volume, in standard cubic feet
(``FVs,p'' in Equation W-10B of Sec. 98.233).
(ii) Flow rate at the beginning of the period of time when
sufficient quantities of gas are present to enable separation, in
standard cubic feet per hour (``FRp,i'' in Equation W-10B of
Sec. 98.233).
* * * * *
(10) Indicate whether the completion(s) or workover(s) included
flared emissions that are reported according to paragraph (n) of this
section in addition to the vented emissions reported under paragraphs
(g)(8) and (9) of this section.
(h) * * *
(1) For each well with one or more gas well completions without
hydraulic fracturing and without flaring, report the information
specified in paragraphs (h)(1)(i) through (vi) of this section.
(i) Well ID number.
* * * * *
(iii) Total number of hours that gas vented directly to the
atmosphere during venting for all completions without hydraulic
fracturing (``Tp'' for completions that vented directly to
the atmosphere as used in Equation W-13B).
(iv) Average daily gas production rate for all completions without
hydraulic
[[Page 50425]]
fracturing without flaring, in standard cubic feet per hour
(``Vp'' in Equation W-13B of Sec. 98.233). You may delay
reporting of this data element if you indicate in the annual report
that the well is a wildcat well and/or delineation well and the only
wells that can be used for the measurement in the same sub-basin and
well type combination are wildcat wells and/or delineation wells. If
you elect to delay reporting of this data element, you must report by
the date specified in paragraph (cc) of this section the measured
average daily gas production rate during completions for the well.
* * * * *
(2) For each well with one or more gas well completions without
hydraulic fracturing and with flaring, report the information specified
in paragraphs (h)(2)(i) through (iv) of this section.
(i) Well ID number.
* * * * *
(iii) Total number of hours that gas vented to a flare during
venting for all completions without hydraulic fracturing (the sum of
all ``Tp'' for completions that vented to a flare from
Equation W-13B).
(iv) Average daily gas production rate for all completions without
hydraulic fracturing with flaring, in standard cubic feet per hour (the
average of all ``Vp'' from Equation W-13B of Sec. 98.233).
You may delay reporting of this data element if you indicate in the
annual report that the well is a wildcat well and/or delineation well
and the only wells that can be used for the measurement in the same
sub-basin and well type combination are wildcat wells and/or
delineation wells. If you elect to delay reporting of this data
element, you must report by the date specified in paragraph (cc) of
this section the measured average daily gas production rate during
completions for the well.
(3) For each well with one or more gas well workovers without
hydraulic fracturing and without flaring, report the information
specified in paragraphs (h)(3)(i) through (iv) of this section.
(i) Well ID number.
* * * * *
(4) For each well with one or more gas well workovers without
hydraulic fracturing and with flaring, report the information specified
in paragraphs (h)(4)(i) and (ii) of this section.
(i) Well ID number.
(ii) Number of workovers that flared gas.
(i) Blowdown vent stacks. You must indicate whether your facility
has blowdown vent stacks. If your facility has blowdown vent stacks,
then you must report whether emissions were calculated by equipment or
event type or by using flow meters or a combination of both. If you
calculated emissions by equipment or event type for any blowdown vent
stacks, then you must report the information specified in paragraph
(i)(1) of this section considering, in aggregate, all blowdown vent
stacks for which emissions were calculated by equipment or event type.
If you calculated emissions using flow meters for any blowdown vent
stacks, then you must report the information specified in paragraph
(i)(2) of this section considering, in aggregate, all blowdown vent
stacks for which emissions were calculated using flow meters. For the
onshore natural gas transmission pipeline segment, you must also report
the information in paragraph (i)(3) of this section. You must report
the information specified in paragraphs (i)(1) through (3) of this
section, as applicable, for each well-pad (for onshore production),
each gathering and boosting site (for onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting), or facility (for all other applicable industry
segments).
(1) Report by equipment or event type. If you calculated emissions
from blowdown vent stacks by the seven categories listed in Sec.
98.233(i)(2)(iv)(A) for onshore petroleum and natural gas production,
onshore natural gas processing, onshore natural gas transmission
compression, underground natural gas storage, LNG storage, LNG import
and export equipment, or onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering
and boosting industry segments, then you must report the equipment or
event types and the information specified in paragraphs (i)(1)(i)
through (iv) of this section for each equipment or event type. If a
blowdown event resulted in emissions from multiple equipment types, and
the emissions cannot be apportioned to the different equipment types,
then you may report the information in paragraphs (i)(1)(i) through
(iv) of this section for the equipment type that represented the
largest portion of the emissions for the blowdown event. If you
calculated emissions from blowdown vent stacks by the eight categories
listed in Sec. 98.233(i)(2)(iv)(B) for the natural gas distribution or
onshore natural gas transmission pipeline segments, then you must
report the pipeline segments or event types and the information
specified in paragraphs (i)(1)(i) through (iv) of this section for each
``equipment or event type'' (i.e., category). If a blowdown event
resulted in emissions from multiple categories, and the emissions
cannot be apportioned to the different categories, then you may report
the information in paragraphs (i)(1)(i) through (iv) of this section
for the ``equipment or event type'' (i.e., category) that represented
the largest portion of the emissions for the blowdown event.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only).
* * * * *
(2) Report by flow meter. If you elect to calculate emissions from
blowdown vent stacks by using a flow meter according to Sec.
98.233(i)(3), then you must report the information specified in
paragraphs (i)(2)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only).
(ii) Annual CO2 emissions from all blowdown vent stacks
for which emissions were calculated using flow meters, in metric tons
CO2 (the sum of all CO2 mass emission values
calculated according to Sec. 98.233(i)(3), for all flow meters).
(iii) Annual CH4 emissions from all blowdown vent stacks
at the facility, well-pad, or gathering and boosting site for which
emissions were calculated using flow meters, in metric tons
CH4, (the sum of all CH4 mass emission values
calculated according to Sec. 98.233(i)(3), for all flow meters).
* * * * *
(j) Hydrocarbon liquids and produced water storage tanks. You must
indicate whether your facility sends hydrocarbon produced liquids and/
or produced water to atmospheric pressure storage tanks. If your
facility sends hydrocarbon produced liquids and/or produced water to
atmospheric pressure storage tanks, then you must indicate which
Calculation Method(s) you used to calculate GHG emissions, and you must
report the information specified in paragraphs (j)(1) and (2) of this
section as applicable. If you used Calculation Method 1 or Calculation
Method 2 of Sec. 98.233(j), and any atmospheric pressure storage tanks
were observed to have malfunctioning dump valves during the calendar
year, then you must indicate that dump valves were malfunctioning and
must report the information specified in paragraph (j)(3) of this
section.
[[Page 50426]]
(1) If you used Calculation Method 1 or Calculation Method 2 of
Sec. 98.233(j) to calculate GHG emissions, then you must report the
information specified in paragraphs (j)(1)(i) through (xvi) of this
section for each well-pad (for onshore petroleum and natural gas
production), gathering and boosting site (for onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting), or facility (for all other
applicable industry segments) and by calculation method and liquid
type, as applicable. Onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting and onshore natural gas processing facilities do not report
the information specified in paragraph (j)(1)(ix) of this section.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only).
(ii) Calculation method used, and name of the software package used
if using Calculation Method 1.
(iii) The total annual hydrocarbon liquids or produced water volume
from gas-liquid separators and direct from wells or non-separator
equipment that is sent to applicable atmospheric pressure storage
tanks, in barrels. You may delay reporting of this data element for
onshore production if you indicate in the annual report that wildcat
wells and delineation wells are the only wells in the sub-basin with
hydrocarbon liquids or produced water production flowing to gas-liquid
separators or direct to atmospheric pressure storage tanks. If you
elect to delay reporting of this data element, you must report by the
date specified in paragraph (cc) of this section the total volume of
hydrocarbon liquids or produced water from all wells and the well ID
number(s) for the well(s) included in this volume.
(iv) The average well, gas-liquid separator, or non-separator
equipment temperature, in degrees Fahrenheit.
(v) The average well, gas-liquid separator, or non-separator
equipment pressure, in pounds per square inch gauge.
(vi) For atmospheric pressure storage tanks receiving hydrocarbon
liquids, the average sales oil or stabilized hydrocarbon liquids API
gravity, in degrees.
(vii) For atmospheric pressure storage tanks receiving hydrocarbon
liquids, the flow-weighted average concentration (mole fraction) of
CO2 in flash gas from atmospheric pressure storage tanks
(calculated as the sum of all products of the concentration of
CO2 in the flash gas for each storage tank times the total
quantity of flash gas for that storage tank, divided by the sum of all
flash gas emissions from storage tanks).
(viii) The flow-weighted average concentration (mole fraction) of
CH4 in flash gas from atmospheric pressure storage tanks
(calculated as the sum of all products of the concentration of
CH4 in the flash gas for each storage tank times the total
quantity of flash gas for that storage tank, divided by the sum of all
flash gas emissions from storage tanks).
(ix) The number of wells sending hydrocarbon liquids or produced
water to gas-liquid separators or directly to atmospheric pressure
storage tanks.
(x) Count of atmospheric pressure storage tanks specified in
paragraphs (j)(1)(x)(A) through (F) of this section.
(A) The number of fixed roof atmospheric pressure storage tanks.
(B) The number of floating roof atmospheric pressure storage tanks.
(C) The number of atmospheric pressure storage tanks that vented
gas directly to the atmosphere and did not control emissions using a
vapor recovery system and/or one or more flares at any point during the
reporting year.
(D) The number of atmospheric pressure storage tanks that routed
emissions to a vapor recovery system at any point during the reporting
year.
(E) The number of atmospheric pressure storage tanks that routed
emissions to one or more flares at any point during the reporting year.
(F) The number of atmospheric pressure storage tanks in paragraph
(j)(1)(x)(D) or (E) of this section that had an open or not properly
seated thief hatch at some point during the year while the storage tank
was also routing emissions to a vapor recovery system and/or a flare.
(xi) For atmospheric pressure storage tanks receiving hydrocarbon
liquids, annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons
CO2, that resulted from venting gas directly to the
atmosphere, calculated according to Sec. 98.233(j)(1) and (2).
(xii) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons
CH4, that resulted from venting gas directly to the
atmosphere, calculated according to Sec. 98.233(j)(1) and (2).
(xiii) For the atmospheric pressure storage tanks receiving
hydrocarbon liquids identified in paragraphs (j)(1)(x)(D) of this
section, total CO2 mass, in metric tons CO2, that
was recovered during the calendar year using a vapor recovery system.
(xiv) For the atmospheric pressure storage tanks identified in
paragraphs (j)(1)(x)(D) of this section, total CH4 mass, in
metric tons CH4, that was recovered during the calendar year
using a vapor recovery system.
(xv) For the atmospheric pressure storage tanks identified in
paragraph (j)(1)(x)(F) of this section, the total volume of gas vented
through open or not properly seated thief hatches, in scf, during
periods while the storage tanks were also routing emissions to vapor
recovery systems and/or flares.
(2) If you used Calculation Method 3 to calculate GHG emissions,
then you must report the information specified in paragraphs (j)(2)(i)
through (iii) of this section.
(i) Report the information specified in paragraphs (j)(2)(i)(A)
through (H) of this section, at the facility level, for atmospheric
pressure storage tanks where emissions were calculated using
Calculation Method 3 of Sec. 98.233(j).
(A) The total annual hydrocarbon liquids throughput that is sent to
all atmospheric pressure storage tanks in the facility with emissions
calculated using Calculation Method 3, in barrels. You may delay
reporting of this data element for onshore production if you indicate
in the annual report that wildcat wells and delineation wells are the
only wells in the sub-basin with hydrocarbon liquids production that
send hydrocarbon liquids to atmospheric pressure storage tanks. If you
elect to delay reporting of this data element, you must report by the
date specified in paragraph (cc) of this section the total annual
hydrocarbon liquids throughput from all wells and the well ID number(s)
for the well(s) included in this volume.
(B) The total annual produced water throughput that is sent to all
atmospheric pressure storage tanks in the facility with emissions
calculated using Calculation Method 3, in barrels, specified in
paragraphs (j)(2)(i)(B)(1) through (3) of this section. You may delay
reporting of this data element for onshore production if you indicate
in the annual report that wildcat wells and delineation wells are the
only wells in the sub-basin flowing to gas-liquid separators or direct
to atmospheric pressure storage tanks. If you elect to delay reporting
of this data element, you must report by the date specified in
paragraph (cc) of this section the total annual volume of produced
water from all wells as specified in paragraphs (j)(2)(i)(B)(1) through
(3) of this section and the well ID number(s) for the well(s) included
in these volumes.
(1) Total volume of produced water with pressure less than or equal
to 50 psi.
(2) Total volume of produced water with pressure greater than 50
psi and less than or equal to 250 psi.
(3) Total volume of produced water with pressure greater than 250
psi.
[[Page 50427]]
(C) An estimate of the fraction of hydrocarbon liquids throughput
reported in paragraph (j)(2)(i)(A) of this section sent to atmospheric
pressure storage tanks in the facility that controlled emissions with
flares.
(D) An estimate of the fraction of hydrocarbon liquids throughput
reported in paragraph (j)(2)(i)(A) of this section sent to atmospheric
pressure storage tanks in the facility that controlled emissions with
vapor recovery systems.
(E) An estimate of the fraction of total produced water throughput
reported in paragraph (j)(2)(i)(B) of this section sent to atmospheric
pressure storage tanks in the facility that controlled emissions with
flares.
(F) An estimate of the fraction of total produced water throughput
reported in paragraph (j)(2)(i)(B) of this section sent to atmospheric
pressure storage tanks in the facility that controlled emissions with
vapor recovery systems.
(G) The number of fixed roof atmospheric pressure storage tanks in
the facility.
(H) The number of floating roof atmospheric pressure storage tanks
in the facility.
(ii) Report the information specified in paragraphs (j)(2)(ii)(A)
through (H) of this section for each well-pad (for onshore production),
gathering and boosting site (for onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting), or facility (for all other applicable industry
segments) with atmospheric pressure storage tanks receiving hydrocarbon
liquids whose emissions were calculated using Sec. 98.233(j)(3)(i).
(A) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only).
(B) The number of atmospheric pressure storage tanks that did not
control emissions with flares and for which emissions were calculated
using Calculation Method 3.
(C) The number of atmospheric pressure storage tanks that
controlled emissions with flares and for which emissions were
calculated using Calculation Method 3.
(D) The number of atmospheric pressure storage tanks that had an
open or not properly seated thief hatch at some point during the year
while the storage tank was also routing emissions to a vapor recovery
system and/or a flare.
(E) The total number of separators, wells, or non-separator
equipment with annual average daily hydrocarbon liquids throughput
greater than 0 barrels per day and less than 10 barrels per day for
which you used Calculation Method 3 (``Count'' from Equation W-15A of
this subpart).
(F) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons CO2,
that resulted from venting gas directly to the atmosphere, calculated
using Equation W-15A of Sec. 98.233(j) and adjusted using the
requirements described in Sec. 98.233(j)(4), if applicable.
(G) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons CH4,
that resulted from venting gas directly to the atmosphere, calculated
using Equation W-15A of Sec. 98.233(j) and adjusted using the
requirements described in Sec. 98.233(j)(4), if applicable.
(H) The total volume of gas vented through open or not properly
seated thief hatches, in scf, during periods while the atmospheric
pressure storage tanks were also routing emissions to vapor recovery
systems and/or flares.
(iii) Report the information specified in paragraphs (j)(2)(iii)(A)
through (F) of this section for each well-pad (for onshore production),
gathering and boosting site (for onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting), or facility (for onshore natural gas
processing) with atmospheric pressure storage tanks receiving produced
water whose emissions were calculated using Sec. 98.233(j)(3)(ii).
(A) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only).
(B) The number of atmospheric pressure storage tanks that did not
control emissions with flares and for which emissions were calculated
using Calculation Method 3.
(C) The number of atmospheric pressure storage tanks that
controlled emissions with flares and for which emissions were
calculated using Calculation Method 3.
(D) The number of atmospheric pressure storage tanks that had an
open or not properly seated thief hatch at some point during the year
while the storage tank was also routing emissions to a vapor recovery
system and/or a flare.
(E) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons CH4,
that resulted from venting gas directly to the atmosphere, calculated
using Equation W-15B of Sec. 98.233(j) and adjusted using the
requirements described in Sec. 98.233(j)(4), if applicable.
(F) The total volume of gas vented through open or not properly
seated thief hatches, in scf, during periods while the atmospheric
pressure storage tanks were also routing emissions to vapor recovery
systems and/or flares.
(3) If you used Calculation Method 1 or Calculation Method 2 of
Sec. 98.233(j), and any gas-liquid separator liquid dump values did
not close properly during the calendar year, then you must report the
information specified in paragraphs (j)(3)(i) through (v) of this
section for each well-pad (for onshore production), gathering and
boosting site (for onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting), or facility (for all other applicable industry segments) by
liquid type.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only).
(ii) The total number of gas-liquid separators whose liquid dump
valves did not close properly during the calendar year.
(iii) The total time the dump valves on gas-liquid separators did
not close properly in the calendar year, in hours (sum of the
``Tdv'' values used in Equation W-16 of this subpart).
(iv) For atmospheric pressure storage tanks receiving hydrocarbon
liquids, annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons
CO2, that resulted from dump valves on gas-liquid separators
not closing properly during the calendar year, calculated using
Equation W-16 of this subpart.
(v) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons CH4,
that resulted from the dump valves on gas-liquid separators not closing
properly during the calendar year, calculated using Equation W-16 of
this subpart.
(k) Condensate storage tanks. You must indicate whether your
facility contains any condensate storage tanks. If your facility
contains at least one condensate storage tank, then you must report the
information specified in paragraphs (k)(1) and (2) of this section for
each condensate storage tank vent stack.
(1) For each condensate storage tank vent stack, report the
information specified in (k)(1)(i) through (iv) of this section.
(i) The unique name or ID number for the condensate storage tank
vent stack.
(ii) Indicate if a flare is attached to the condensate storage tank
vent stack.
(iii) Indicate whether scrubber dump valve leakage occurred for the
condensate storage tank vent according to Sec. 98.233(k)(1).
(iv) Which method specified in Sec. 98.233(k)(1) was used to
determine if dump valve leakage occurred.
(2) If scrubber dump valve leakage occurred for a condensate
storage tank vent stack, as reported in paragraph
[[Page 50428]]
(k)(1)(iii) of this section, and the vent stack vented directly to the
atmosphere during the calendar year, then you must report the
information specified in paragraphs (k)(2)(i) through (v) of this
section for each condensate storage vent stack where scrubber dump
valve leakage occurred.
(i) Which method specified in Sec. 98.233(k)(2) was used to
measure the leak rate.
* * * * *
(l) * * *
(1) For oil wells not routed to a flare, you must report the
information specified in paragraphs (l)(1)(i) through (vii) of this
section for each well tested.
(i) [Reserved]
(ii) Well ID number.
(iii) Number of well testing days for the tested well in the
calendar year.
(iv) Average gas to oil ratio for the tested well, in cubic feet of
gas per barrel of oil.
(v) Average flow rate for the tested well, in barrels of oil per
day. You may delay reporting of this data element if you indicate in
the annual report that the well is a wildcat well and/or delineation
well and the only oil wells that are tested in the same basin are
wildcat wells and/or delineation wells. If you elect to delay reporting
of this data element, you must report by the date specified in
paragraph (cc) of this section the measured average flow rate for the
tested well.
* * * * *
(2) For oil wells routed to a flare, you must report the
information specified in paragraphs (l)(2)(i) through (v) of this
section for each well tested. All reported data elements should be
specific to the well for which Equation W-17A of Sec. 98.233 was used
and for which well testing emissions were routed to flares.
(i) [Reserved]
(ii) Well ID number.
(iii) Number of well testing days for the tested well in the
calendar year.
(iv) Average gas to oil ratio for the tested well, in cubic feet of
gas per barrel of oil.
(v) Average flow rate for the tested well, in barrels of oil per
day. You may delay reporting of this data element if you indicate in
the annual report that the well is a wildcat well and/or delineation
well and the only wells that are tested in the same basin are wildcat
wells and/or delineation wells. If you elect to delay reporting of this
data element, you must report by the date specified in paragraph (cc)
of this section the measured average flow rate for the tested well.
(3) For gas wells not routed to a flare, you must report the
information specified in paragraphs (l)(3)(i) through (vi) of this
section for each well tested.
(i) [Reserved]
(ii) Well ID number.
(iii) Number of well testing days for the tested well(s) in the
calendar year.
(iv) Average annual production rate for the tested well, in actual
cubic feet per day. You may delay reporting of this data element if you
indicate in the annual report that the well is a wildcat well and/or
delineation well and the only wells that are tested in the same basin
are wildcat wells and/or delineation wells. If you elect to delay
reporting of this data element, you must report by the date specified
in paragraph (cc) of this section the measured average annual
production rate for the tested well.
* * * * *
(4) For gas wells routed to a flare, you must report the
information specified in paragraphs (l)(4)(i) through (iv) of this
section for each well tested. All reported data elements should be
specific to the well for which Equation W-17B of Sec. 98.233 was used
and for which well testing emissions were routed to flares.
(i) [Reserved]
(ii) Well ID number.
(iii) Number of well testing days for the tested well in the
calendar year.
(iv) Average annual production rate for the tested well, in actual
cubic feet per day. You may delay reporting of this data element if you
indicate in the annual report that the well is a wildcat well and/or
delineation well and the only wells that are tested in the same basin
are wildcat wells and/or delineation wells. If you elect to delay
reporting of this data element, you must report by the date specified
in paragraph (cc) of this section the measured average annual
production rate for the tested well.
(m) Associated natural gas. You must indicate whether any
associated gas was vented or flared during the calendar year. If
associated gas was vented during the calendar year, then you must
report the information specified in paragraphs (m)(1) through (7) of
this section for each well for which associated gas was vented. If
associated gas was flared during the calendar year, then you must
report the information specified in paragraphs (m)(1) through (3) of
this section for each well for which associated gas was flared.
(1) Well ID number.
* * * * *
(4) Average gas to oil ratio, in standard cubic feet of gas per
barrel of oil. Do not report the GOR if you vented or flared associated
gas and used a continuous flow monitor to determine the total volume of
associated gas vented or routed to the flare (i.e., if you did not use
Equation W-18 for the well with associated gas venting or flaring
emissions).
(5) Volume of oil produced by the well, in barrels, in the calendar
year only during the time periods in which associated gas was vented or
flared (``Vp'' used in Equation W-18 of Sec. 98.233). You
may delay reporting of this data element if you indicate in the annual
report that the well is a wildcat well and/or delineation well and the
only wells from which associated gas was vented or flared in the same
sub-basin are wildcat wells and/or delineation wells. If you elect to
delay reporting of this data element, you must report by the date
specified in paragraph (cc) of this section the volume of oil produced
by the well during the time periods in which associated gas venting and
flaring was occurring. Do not report the volume of oil produced if you
vented or flared associated gas and used a continuous flow monitor to
determine the total volume of associated gas vented or routed to the
flare (i.e., if you did not use Equation W-18 for the well with
associated gas venting or flaring emissions).
(6) Total volume of associated gas sent to sales or used on site
and not sent to a vent or flare, in standard cubic feet, in the
calendar year only during time periods in which associated gas was
vented or flared (``SG'' value used in Equation W-18 of Sec.
98.233(m)). You may delay reporting of this data element if you
indicate in the annual report that the well is a wildcat well and/or
delineation well and the only wells from which associated gas was
vented or flared in the same basin are wildcat wells and/or delineation
wells. If you elect to delay reporting of this data element, you must
report by the date specified in paragraph (cc) of this section the
measured total volume of associated gas sent to sales for the well
during the time periods in which associated gas venting and flaring was
occurring. Do not report the volume of gas sent to sales if you vented
or flared associated gas and used a continuous flow monitor to
determine the total volume of associated gas vented or routed to the
flare (i.e., if you did not use Equation W-18).
(7) If you had associated gas emissions vented directly to the
atmosphere without flaring, then you must report the information
specified in paragraphs (m)(7)(i) through (viii) of this section for
each well.
(i) [Reserved]
(ii) Indicate whether the associated gas volume vented from the
well was
[[Page 50429]]
measured using a continuous flow monitor.
(iii) Indicate whether associated gas streams vented from the well
were measured with continuous gas composition analyzers.
(iv) Total volume of associated gas vented from the well, in
standard cubic feet.
(v) Flow-weighted average mole fraction of CH4 in
associated gas vented from the well.
(vi) Flow-weighted average mole fraction of CO2 in
associated gas vented from the well.
(vii) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons
CO2, calculated according to Sec. 98.233(m)(3) and (4).
(viii) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons
CH4, calculated according to Sec. 98.233(m)(3) and (4).
(n) Flare stacks. You must indicate if your facility has any flare
stacks. You must report the information specified in paragraphs (n)(1)
through (20) of this section for each flare stack at your facility.
(1) Unique name or ID for the flare stack. For the onshore
petroleum and natural gas production and onshore petroleum and natural
gas gathering and boosting industry segments, a different name or ID
may be used for a single flare stack for each location where it
operates at in a given calendar year.
(2) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only).
(3) Unique IDs for each stream routed to the flare if you measure
the flow of each stream that is routed to the flare as specified in
Sec. 98.233(n)(1)(ii) and/or you measure the gas composition for each
stream routed to the flare as specified in Sec. 98.233(n)(3)(iii) or
(iv).
(4) Indicate the type of flare (i.e., open ground-level flare,
enclosed ground-level flare, open elevated flare, or enclosed elevated
flare).
(5) Indicate the type of flare assist (i.e., unassisted, air-
assisted with single speed fan/blower, air-assisted with dual speed
fan/blower, air-assisted with variable speed fan/blower, steam-
assisted, or pressure-assisted).
(6) Indicate whether the pilot flame or combustion flame was
monitored continuously, visually inspected, or both. If visually
inspected, report the number of inspections during the year, and
indicate whether the flare has a continuous pilot or auto igniter. If
the pilot flame was monitored continuously, report the number of times
the continuous monitoring device was out of service or otherwise
inoperable for a period of more than one week.
(7) Indicate whether the volume of gas was determined using a
continuous flow measurement device or whether it was determined using
parameter monitoring and engineering calculations (Sec.
98.233(n)(1)(i) for inlet gas to the flare or Sec. 98.233(n)(1)(ii)
for each stream routed to the flare). If you switched from one method
to the other during the year, then indicate both methods were used.
(8) Indicate whether the gas composition was calculated using a
continuous gas composition analyzer or by taking samples of the
applicable gas stream(s) at least once per quarter (Sec.
98.233(n)(3)(i) or (iii) for the inlet gas to the flare or Sec.
98.233(n)(3)(ii) or (iv) for the streams from each source that routes
emissions to the flare). If you switched from one method to the other
during the year, then indicate both methods were used.
(9) Flare-specific HHV, if you determined a flare-specific HHV
based on measured composition of the inlet gas to the flare as
specified in Sec. 98.233(n)(8)(i) or if you calculated a flare-
specific HHV based on the calculated flow-weighted average composition
for the inlet gas to the flare as specified in Sec. 98.233(n)(8)(iii).
Each individual stream HHV, if you determined HHVs for each individual
stream routed to the flare and you used these HHVs to calculate
N2O emissions for each stream as specified in Sec.
98.233(n)(8)(ii).
(10) For the onshore petroleum and natural gas production, onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting, and onshore natural
gas processing industry segments, estimated fraction of total volume
flared that was received from another facility solely for flaring
(e.g., gas separated from liquid at a production facility that is
routed to a flare that is assigned to an onshore petroleum and natural
gas gathering and boosting facility).
(11) Volume of gas sent to the flare, in standard cubic feet
(``Vs'' in Equations W-19 and W-20 of this subpart). If you
determine the volume of gas for each stream routed to the flare as
specified in Sec. 98.233(n)(1)(ii), then also report the annual volume
of each measured stream.
(12) Fraction of the feed gas sent to an un-lit flare based on
total time when continuous monitoring of the pilot or periodic
inspections indicated the flare was not lit and the flow determined by
continuous measurement of flow conducted during the times when the
flare was not lit (``Zu'' in Equation W-19 of this subpart).
(13) Flare combustion efficiency, expressed as the fraction of gas
combusted by a burning flare (Sec. 98.233(n)(4)). If you used multiple
monitoring methods during the year, report the flow-weighted average
combustion efficiency based on each tier that applied. Report the
efficiency to one decimal place.
(i) If you report using the 95 percent default combustion
efficiency, indicate if you are subject to part 60, subpart OOOOb of
this chapter or if you are electing to comply with the flare monitoring
requirements in part 60, subpart OOOOb of this chapter.
(ii) If you are not required to comply with part 60, subpart OOOOb
of this chapter but you elect to comply with the monitoring
requirements in Sec. 60.5417b(d)(1)(viii) of this chapter as specified
in Sec. 98.233(n)(4), indicate whether you use a calorimeter to
continuously determine net heating value (NHV) or if you have
demonstrated according to the methods described in Sec.
60.5417b(d)(1)(viii)(C) of this chapter that the NHV consistently
exceeds the operating limit specified in Sec. 60.18 of this chapter
(or that it consistently exceeds 800 Btu/scf for a pressure assist
flare).
(14) Annual average mole fraction of CH4 in the feed gas
to the flare if you measure composition of the inlet gas as specified
in Sec. 98.233(n)(3)(i) or (ii) (``XCH4'' in Equation W-19
of this subpart), or the annual average CH4 mole fractions
for each stream if you measure composition of each stream routed to the
flare as specified in Sec. 98.233(n)(3)(iii) or (iv).
(15) Annual average mole fraction of CO2 in the feed gas
to the flare if you measure composition of the inlet gas as specified
in Sec. 98.233(n)(3)(i) or (ii) (``XCO2'' in Equation W-20
of this subpart), or the annual average CO2 mole fractions
for each stream if you measure composition of each stream routed to the
flare as specified in Sec. 98.233(n)(3)(iii) or (iv).
(16) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons CO2
(refer to Equation W-20 of this subpart).
(17) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons CH4
(refer to Equation W-19 of this subpart).
(18) Annual N2O emissions, in metric tons N2O
(refer to Equation W-40 of this subpart).
(19) Estimated disaggregated CH4, CO2, and
N2O emissions attributed to each source type as determined
using engineering calculations and best available data as specified in
Sec. 98.233(n)(10) (i.e., AGR vents, dehydrator vents, well venting
during completions and workovers with
[[Page 50430]]
hydraulic fracturing, gas well venting during completions and workovers
without hydraulic fracturing, hydrocarbon liquids and produced water
storage tanks, well testing venting and flaring, associated gas venting
and flaring, other flared sources).
(20) Indicate whether a CEMS was used to measure emissions from the
flare. If a CEMS was used, then you are not required to report the
CO2 mole fraction in paragraph (n)(15) of this section.
(o) Centrifugal compressors. You must indicate whether your
facility has centrifugal compressors. You must report the information
specified in paragraphs (o)(1) and (2) of this section for all
centrifugal compressors at your facility. For each compressor source or
manifolded group of compressor sources that you conduct as found leak
measurements as specified in Sec. 98.233(o)(2) or (4), you must report
the information specified in paragraph (o)(3) of this section. For each
compressor source or manifolded group of compressor sources that you
conduct continuous monitoring as specified in Sec. 98.233(o)(3) or
(5), you must report the information specified in paragraph (o)(4) of
this section. Centrifugal compressors in onshore petroleum and natural
gas production and onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting that calculate emissions according to Sec. 98.233(o)(10)(iii)
are not required to report information in paragraphs (o)(1) through (4)
of this section and instead must report the information specified in
paragraph (o)(5) of this section.
(1) Compressor activity data. Report the information specified in
paragraphs (o)(1)(i) through (xi) of this section, as applicable, for
each centrifugal compressor located at your facility.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only).
(ii) Unique name or ID for the centrifugal compressor.
(iii) Hours in operating-mode.
(iv) Hours in standby-pressurized-mode.
(v) Hours in not-operating-depressurized-mode.
(vi) If you conducted volumetric emission measurements as specified
in Sec. 98.233(o)(1):
(A) Indicate whether the compressor was measured in operating-mode.
(B) Indicate whether the compressor was measured in standby-
pressurized-mode.
(C) Indicate whether the compressor was measured in not-operating-
depressurized-mode.
(vii) Indicate whether the compressor has blind flanges installed
and associated dates.
(viii) Indicate whether the compressor has wet or dry seals.
(ix) If the compressor has wet seals, the number of wet seals.
(x) If the compressor has dry seals, the number of dry seals.
(xi) Power output of the compressor driver (hp).
(2) * * *
(i) * * *
(A) Centrifugal compressor name or ID. Use the same ID as in
paragraph (o)(1)(ii) of this section.
(B) Centrifugal compressor source (wet seal, dry seal, isolation
valve, or blowdown valve).
* * * * *
(ii) * * *
(A) Indicate whether the leak or vent is for a single compressor
source or manifolded group of compressor sources and whether the
emissions from the leak or vent are released to the atmosphere, routed
to a flare, combustion, or vapor recovery system.
* * * * *
(D) Report emissions as specified in paragraphs (o)(2)(ii)(D)(1)
and (2) of this section for the leak or vent. If the leak or vent is
routed to a flare, combustion, or vapor recovery system, you are not
required to report emissions under this paragraph.
* * * * *
(E) If the leak or vent is routed to flare, combustion, or vapor
recovery system, report the percentage of time that the respective
device was operational when the compressor source emissions were routed
to the device.
* * * * *
(5) Onshore petroleum and natural gas production and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting. Centrifugal
compressors with wet seal degassing vents in onshore petroleum and
natural gas production and onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering
and boosting that calculate emissions according to Sec.
98.233(o)(10)(iii) must report the information specified in paragraphs
(o)(5)(i) through (iv) of this section. You must report the information
specified in paragraphs (o)(5)(i) through (iv) of this section, as
applicable, for each well-pad (for onshore petroleum and natural gas
production) or each gathering and boosting site (for onshore petroleum
and natural gas gathering and boosting).
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only).
(ii) Report the following activity data.
(A) Total number of centrifugal compressors at the facility.
(B) Number of centrifugal compressors that have wet seals.
(C) Number of centrifugal compressors that have atmospheric wet
seal oil degassing vents (i.e., wet seal oil degassing vents where the
emissions are released to the atmosphere rather than being routed to
flares, combustion, or vapor recovery systems).
(iii) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons
CO2, from centrifugal compressors with atmospheric wet seal
oil degassing vents.
(iv) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons
CH4, from centrifugal compressors with atmospheric wet seal
oil degassing vents.
(p) Reciprocating compressors. You must indicate whether your
facility has reciprocating compressors. You must report the information
specified in paragraphs (p)(1) and (2) of this section for all
reciprocating compressors at your facility. For each compressor source
or manifolded group of compressor sources that you conduct as found
leak measurements as specified in Sec. 98.233(p)(2) or (4), you must
report the information specified in paragraph (p)(3) of this section.
For each compressor source or manifolded group of compressor sources
that you conduct continuous monitoring as specified in Sec.
98.233(p)(3) or (5), you must report the information specified in
paragraph (p)(4) of this section. Reciprocating compressors in onshore
petroleum and natural gas production and onshore petroleum and natural
gas gathering and boosting that calculate emissions according to Sec.
98.233(p)(10)(iii) are not required to report information in paragraphs
(p)(1) through (4) of this section and instead must report the
information specified in paragraph (p)(5) of this section.
(1) Compressor activity data. Report the information specified in
paragraphs (p)(1)(i) through (viii) of this section, as applicable, for
each reciprocating compressor located at your facility.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only).
(ii) Unique name or ID for the reciprocating compressor.
(iii) Hours in operating-mode.
(iv) Hours in standby-pressurized-mode.
[[Page 50431]]
(v) Hours in not-operating-depressurized-mode.
(vi) If you conducted volumetric emission measurements as specified
in Sec. 98.233(p)(1):
(A) Indicate whether the compressor was measured in operating-mode.
(B) Indicate whether the compressor was measured in standby-
pressurized-mode.
(C) Indicate whether the compressor was measured in not-operating-
depressurized-mode.
(vii) Indicate whether the compressor has blind flanges installed
and associated dates.
(viii) Power output of the compressor driver (hp).
(2) * * *
(ii) * * *
(A) Indicate whether the leak or vent is for a single compressor
source or manifolded group of compressor sources and whether the
emissions from the leak or vent are released to the atmosphere, routed
to a flare, combustion, or vapor recovery system.
* * * * *
(D) Report emissions as specified in paragraphs (p)(2)(ii)(D)(1)
and (2) of this section for the leak or vent. If the leak or vent is
routed to a flare, combustion, or vapor recovery system, you are not
required to report emissions under this paragraph.
* * * * *
(E) If the leak or vent is routed to a flare, combustion, or vapor
recovery system, report the percentage of time that the respective
device was operational when the compressor source emissions were routed
to the device.
(3) * * *
(ii) For each compressor mode-source combination where a reporter
emission factor as calculated in Equation W-28 was used to calculate
emissions in Equation W-27, report the information specified in
paragraphs (p)(3)(ii)(A) through (D) of this section.
* * * * *
(5) Onshore petroleum and natural gas production and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting. Reciprocating
compressors in onshore petroleum and natural gas production and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting that calculate
emissions according to Sec. 98.233(p)(10)(iii) must report the
information specified in paragraphs (p)(5)(i) through (iv) of this
section. You must report the information specified in paragraphs
(p)(5)(i) through (iv) of this section, as applicable, for each well-
pad (for onshore petroleum and natural gas production) or each
gathering and boosting site (for onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting).
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only).
(ii) Report the following activity data.
(A) Total number of reciprocating compressors at the facility.
(B) Number of reciprocating compressors that have rod packing
emissions vented directly to the atmosphere (i.e., rod packing vents
where the emissions are released to the atmosphere rather than being
routed to flares, combustion, or vapor recovery systems).
(iii) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons
CO2, from reciprocating compressors with rod packing
emissions vented directly to the atmosphere.
(iv) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons
CH4, from reciprocating compressors with rod packing
emissions vented directly to the atmosphere.
(q) Equipment leak surveys. For any components subject to or
complying with the requirements of Sec. 98.233(q), you must report the
information specified in paragraphs (q)(1) and (2) of this section. You
must report the information specified in paragraphs (q)(1) and (2) of
this section, as applicable, for each well-pad (for onshore
production), gathering and boosting site (for onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting), or facility (for all other
applicable industry segments). Natural gas distribution facilities with
emission sources listed in Sec. 98.232(i)(1) must also report the
information specified in paragraph (q)(3) of this section.
(1) You must report the information specified in paragraphs
(q)(1)(i) through (ix) of this section.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only).
(ii) Except as specified in paragraph (q)(1)(iii) of this section,
the number of complete equipment leak surveys performed during the
calendar year.
(iii) Natural gas distribution facilities performing equipment leak
surveys across a multiple year leak survey cycle must report the number
of years in the leak survey cycle.
(iv) Except for natural gas distribution facilities, indicate
whether any of the leak detection surveys used in calculating emissions
per Sec. 98.233(q)(2) were conducted for compliance with any of the
standards in paragraphs (q)(1)(iv)(A) through (E) of this section.
Report the indication per well-pad, gathering and boosting site, or
facility, not per component type, as applicable.
(A) The well site or compressor station fugitive emissions
standards in Sec. 60.5397a of this chapter.
(B) The well site, centralized production facility, or compressor
station fugitive emissions standards in Sec. 60.5397b of this chapter.
(C) The well site, centralized production facility, or compressor
station fugitive emissions standards in an applicable approved state
plan or applicable Federal plan in part 62 of this chapter.
(D) The standards for equipment leaks at onshore natural gas
processing plants in Sec. 60.5400b of this chapter.
(E) The standards for equipment leaks at onshore natural gas
processing plants in an applicable approved state plan or applicable
Federal plan in part 62 of this chapter.
(v) For facilities in onshore petroleum and natural gas production,
onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting, onshore
natural gas transmission compression, underground natural gas storage,
LNG storage, and LNG import and export equipment, indicate whether you
elected to comply with Sec. 98.233(q) according to Sec.
98.233(q)(1)(iv) for any equipment components at your well-pad,
gathering and boosting site, or facility.
(vi) Report each type of method described in Sec. 98.234(a) that
was used to conduct leak surveys.
(vii) Report whether emissions were calculated using Calculation
Method 1 (leaker factor emission calculation methodology) and/or using
Calculation Method 2 (leaker measurement methodology).
(viii) For facilities in onshore petroleum and natural gas
production and onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting, report the number of major equipment (as listed in Table W-1)
by service type for which leak detection surveys were conducted and
emissions calculated according to Sec. 98.233(q).
(ix) For facilities in onshore petroleum and natural gas production
and onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting, report
the number of major equipment (as listed in Table W-1) in vacuum
service as defined in Sec. 98.238.
(2) You must indicate whether your facility contains any of the
component types subject to or complying with Sec. 98.233(q) that are
listed in Sec. 98.232(c)(21), (d)(7), (e)(7) or (8), (f)(5) through
(8), (g)(4), (g)(6) or (7), (h)(5), (h)(7) or (8), (i)(1), or (j)(10)
for your facility's industry segment. For each component type and leak
detection
[[Page 50432]]
method combination that is located at your well-pad, gathering and
boosting site, or facility, you must report the information specified
in paragraphs (q)(2)(i) through (ix) of this section. If a component
type is located at your well-pad, gathering and boosting site, or
facility and no leaks were identified from that component, then you
must report the information in paragraphs (q)(2)(i) through (ix) of
this section but report a zero (``0'') for the information required
according to paragraphs (q)(2)(vi) through (ix) of this section. If you
used Calculation Method 1 (leaker factor emission calculation
methodology) for some complete leak surveys and used Calculation Method
2 (leaker measurement methodology) for some complete leak surveys, you
must report the information specified in paragraphs (q)(2)(i) through
(ix) of this section separately for component surveys using Calculation
Method 1 and Calculation Method 2.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only).
(ii) Component type.
(iii) Leak detection method used for the screening survey (e.g.,
Method 21 as specified in Sec. 98.234(a)(2)(i); Method 21 as specified
in Sec. 98.234(a)(2)(ii); and OGI and other leak detection methods as
specified in Sec. 98.234(a)(1), (3), or (5)).
(iv) Emission factor or measurement method used (e.g., default
emission factor; site-specific emission factor developed according to
Sec. 98.233(q)(4); or direct measurement according to Sec.
98.233(q)(3)).
(v) Total number of components surveyed by type and leak detection
method in the calendar year.
(vi) Total number of the surveyed component types by leak detection
method that were identified as leaking in the calendar year
(``xp'' in Equation W-30 of this subpart for the component
type or the number of leaks measured for the specified component type
according to the provisions in Sec. 98.233(q)(3)).
(vii) Average time the surveyed components are assumed to be
leaking and operational, in hours (average of ``Tp,z'' from
Equation W-30 of this subpart for the component type or average
duration of leaks for the specified component type determined according
to the provisions in Sec. 98.233(q)(3)(ii)).
(viii) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons
CO2, for the component type as calculated using Equation W-
30 or Sec. 98.233(q)(3)(vii) (for surveyed components only).
(ix) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons
CH4, for the component type as calculated using Equation W-
30 or Sec. 98.233(q)(3)(vii) (for surveyed components only).
* * * * *
(r) Equipment leaks by population count. If your facility is
subject to the requirements of Sec. 98.233(r), then you must report
the information specified in paragraphs (r)(1) through (3) of this
section, as applicable. You must report the information specified in
paragraphs (r)(1) through (3) of this section, as applicable, for each
well-pad (for onshore petroleum and natural gas production), gathering
and boosting site (for onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting), or facility (for all other applicable industry segments).
(1) You must indicate whether your facility contains any of the
emission source types required to use Equation W-32A of Sec. 98.233.
You must report the information specified in paragraphs (r)(1)(i)
through (vi) of this section separately for each emission source type
required to use Equation W-32A that is located at your facility. For
each well-pad and gathering and boosting site at onshore petroleum and
natural gas production facilities and onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facilities you must report the information
specified in paragraphs (r)(1)(i) through (vi) of this section
separately by equipment type and service type.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only).
(ii) Emission source type. Onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facilities and onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering
and boosting facilities must report the equipment type and service
type.
(iii) Total number of the emission source type at the well-pad,
gathering and boosting site, or facility, as applicable
(``Counte'' in Equation W-32A of this subpart).
(iv) Average estimated time that the emission source type was
operational in the calendar year, in hours (``Te'' in
Equation W-32A of this subpart).
(v) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons CO2,
for the emission source type.
(vi) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons
CH4, for the emission source type.
* * * * *
(3) You must indicate whether your facility contains any emission
source types in vacuum service as defined in Sec. 98.238. If your
facility contains equipment in vacuum service, you must report the
information specified in paragraphs (r)(3)(i) through (iii) of this
section separately for each emission source type in vacuum service that
is located at your well-pad, gathering and boosting site, or facility,
as applicable.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only).
(ii) Emission source type.
(iii) Total number of the emission source type at the well-pad,
gathering and boosting site, or facility, as applicable.
(s) Offshore petroleum and natural gas production. You must report
the information specified in paragraphs (s)(1) through (3) of this
section for your facility.
(1) For facilities that report to BOEM's emissions inventory, the
BOEM Facility ID(s) that correspond(s) to this facility.
(2) If you adjusted emissions according to Sec. 98.233(s)(1)(i) or
(s)(2)(i), report the information specified in paragraphs (s)(2)(i) and
(ii) of this section.
(i) Facility operating hours for the year of the most recent BOEM
emissions inventory.
(ii) Facility operating hours for the current year.
(3) For each emission source type listed in the most recently
published BOEM emissions inventory, report the information specified in
paragraphs (s)(3)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons CO2.
(ii) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons
CH4.
(iii) Annual N2O emissions, in metric tons
N2O.
* * * * *
(x) * * *
(1) Well-pad ID.
* * * * *
(y) Other large release events. You must indicate whether there
were any other large release events from your facility during the
reporting year and indicate whether your facility was notified of a
potential super-emitter release under the provisions of Sec. 60.5371b
of this chapter or an applicable approved state plan or applicable
Federal plan in part 62 of this chapter. If there were any other large
release events, you must report the total number of other large release
events from your facility that occurred during the reporting year and,
for each
[[Page 50433]]
other large release event, report the information specified in
paragraphs (y)(1) through (10) of this section. If you received a
notification of a potential super-emitter release from a third-party
for this facility or a super-emitter release notification under the
provisions of Sec. 60.5371b of this chapter or an applicable approved
state plan or applicable Federal plan in part 62 of this chapter, you
must also report the information specified in paragraph (y)(11) of this
section.
(1) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only).
(2) Unique release event identification number (e.g., Event 1,
Event 2).
(3) The latitude and longitude of the release in decimal degrees to
at least four digits to the right of the decimal point.
(4) The approximate start date, start time, and duration (in hours)
of the release event, and an indication of how the start date and time
were determined (determined based on pressure monitor, temperature
monitor, other monitored process parameter (specify), assigned based on
last monitoring or measurement survey showing no large release, or used
the 182-day default maximum duration).
(5) A general description of the event. Include:
(i) Identification of the equipment involved in the release.
(ii) A description of how the release occurred, from one of the
following categories: maintenance event, fire/explosion, gas well
blowout, oil well blowout, gas well release, oil well release, pressure
relief, large leak, and other (specify).
(iii) An indication of whether the release exceeded a threshold in
Sec. 98.233(y)(1)(i) or in Sec. 98.233(y)(1)(ii).
(iv) A description of the technology or method used to identify the
release.
(v) An indication of whether the release was identified under the
provisions of Sec. 60.5371b of this chapter or an applicable approved
state plan or applicable Federal plan in part 62 of this chapter or a
third-party notification and, if the release was identified under the
provisions of Sec. 60.5371b of this chapter or an applicable approved
state plan or applicable Federal plan in part 62 of this chapter or a
third-party notification, a unique notification ID number for the
notification as assigned in paragraph (y)(11)(i) of this section.
(vi) An indication of whether a portion of the natural gas released
was combusted during the release, and if so, the fraction of the
natural gas released that was estimated to be combusted and the assumed
combustion efficiency for the combusted natural gas.
(6) The total volume of gas released during the event in standard
cubic feet.
(7) The volume fraction of CO2 in the gas released
during the event.
(8) The volume fraction of CH4 in the gas released
during the event.
(9) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons CO2,
from the release event that occurred during the reporting year.
(10) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons
CH4, from the release event that occurred during the
reporting year and the maximum CH4 emissions rate, in
kilograms per hour, determined for any period of the event according to
the provisions of Sec. 98.233(y)(2)(i).
(11) Report the total number of super-emitter release notifications
received from a third party for this facility during the reporting year
and, for each such super-emitter release notification, report the
information specified in paragraphs (y)(11)(i) through (vi) of this
section.
(i) Unique notification identification number (e.g.,
Notification_01, Notification_02). If a unique notification number was
provided with a notification received under the provisions of Sec.
60.5371b of this chapter, an applicable approved state plan, or
applicable Federal plan in part 62 of this chapter, report the number
associated with the event provided in the notification.
(ii) The latitude and longitude of the release as provided in the
notification.
(iii) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only) to which the notification was attributed.
(iv) An indication of whether the super-emitter release
notification was received under the provisions of Sec. 60.5371b of
this chapter, an applicable approved state plan, or applicable Federal
plan in part 62 of this chapter, or from another third-party. If the
notification was received from another third-party, report the
following information about the notifier and data received, if known.
(A) The name of the person and/or company that provided the
notification.
(B) The method used during by the notifier to quantify the
emissions (satellite detection; remote-sensing equipment on aircraft;
mobile monitoring platform; other, specify; or unknown).
(C) The date(s) and time(s) the measurement was made.
(D) The measured methane emission rate and uncertainty bounds (in
kilograms per hour).
(v) Based on any assessment or investigation triggered by the
notification, indicate if the emissions were from normal operations, a
planned maintenance event, leaking equipment, malfunctioning equipment
or device, or undetermined cause.
(vi) An indication of whether the emissions identified via the
notification are included in annual emissions reported for under this
subpart and, if so, the source type under which those emissions are
reported. If the emissions were reported following the requirements of
Sec. 98.233(y) as an other large release event, report the unique
release event identification number assigned to the other large release
event as reported in paragraph (y)(2) of this section. If the emissions
identified via the notification are not included in annual emissions
reported under this subpart, you must provide the reason for not
including the emissions related to this notification (the emissions
could not be verified or corroborated during site inspection or
facility data records; the location of the emissions as provided in the
notification do not belong to the facility; the information was
determined not to be credible, explain; other, specify).
(z) Combustion equipment at onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facilities, onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting facilities, and natural gas distribution facilities. If your
facility is required by Sec. 98.232(c)(22), (i)(7), or (j)(12) to
report emissions from combustion equipment, then you must indicate
whether your facility has any combustion units subject to reporting
according to paragraph (a)(1)(xx), (a)(8)(vi), or (a)(9)(xiii) of this
section. If your facility contains any combustion units subject to
reporting according to paragraph (a)(1)(xx), (a)(8)(vi), or
(a)(9)(xiii) of this section, then you must report the information
specified in paragraphs (z)(1) and (2) of this section, as applicable.
You must report the information specified in paragraphs (z)(1) and (2)
of this section, as applicable, for each well-pad (for onshore
petroleum and natural gas production), gathering and boosting site (for
onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting), or facility
(for all other applicable industry segments).
(1) Indicate whether the combustion units include: External fuel
combustion units with a rated heat capacity less than or equal to 5
million Btu per hour; or, internal fuel combustion units that are not
compressor-drivers, with a rated
[[Page 50434]]
heat capacity less than or equal to 1 mmBtu/hr (or the equivalent of
130 horsepower). If the facility contains external fuel combustion
units with a rated heat capacity less than or equal to 5 million Btu
per hour or internal fuel combustion units that are not compressor-
drivers, with a rated heat capacity less than or equal to 1 million Btu
per hour (or the equivalent of 130 horsepower), then you must report
the information specified in paragraphs (z)(1)(i) through (iii) of this
section for each unit type.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only).
(ii) The type of combustion unit.
(iii) The total number of combustion units.
(2) Indicate whether the combustion units include: External fuel
combustion units with a rated heat capacity greater than 5 million Btu
per hour; internal fuel combustion units that are not compressor-
drivers, with a rated heat capacity greater than 1 million Btu per hour
(or the equivalent of 130 horsepower); or, internal fuel combustion
units of any heat capacity that are compressor-drivers. For each type
of combustion unit at your facility, you must report the information
specified in paragraphs (z)(2)(i) through (iv) and (z)(2)(viii) through
(x) of this section, except for internal fuel combustion units that are
not compressor-drivers, with a rated heat capacity greater than 1
million Btu per hour (or the equivalent of 130 horsepower) or internal
fuel combustion units of any heat capacity that are compressor-drivers
that combust natural gas meeting the criteria in Sec. 98.233(z)(1) or
(2), which must report the information specified in paragraphs
(z)(2)(i) through (x) of this section. Information must be reported for
each combustion unit type, fuel type, and method for determining the
CH4 emission factor combination, as applicable.
(i) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only).
(ii) The type of combustion unit including external fuel combustion
units with a rated heat capacity greater than 5 million Btu per hour;
internal fuel combustion units that are not compressor-drivers, with a
rated heat capacity greater than 1 million Btu per hour (or the
equivalent of 130 horsepower); or internal fuel combustion units of any
heat capacity that are compressor-drivers.
(iii) The type of fuel combusted.
(iv) The quantity of fuel combusted in the calendar year, in
thousand standard cubic feet, gallons, or tons.
(v) The equipment type, including reciprocating 2-stroke-lean burn,
reciprocating 4-stroke lean-burn, reciprocating 4-stroke rich-burn, and
gas turbine.
(vi) The method used to determine the methane emission factor,
including the default emission factor from Table W-7 of subpart W, OEM
data, or performance tests in Sec. 98.234(i).
(vii) The value of the CH4 emission factor (kg
CH4/mmBtu).
(viii) Annual CO2 emissions, in metric tons
CO2, calculated according to Sec. 98.233(z)(1) through (3).
(ix) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons
CH4, calculated according to Sec. 98.233(z)(1) through (3).
(x) Annual N2O emissions, in metric tons N2O,
calculated according to Sec. 98.233(z)(1) through (3).
(aa) Industry segment-specific information. Each facility must
report the information specified in paragraphs (aa)(1) through (11) of
this section, for each applicable industry segment, determined using a
flow meter that meets the requirements of Sec. 98.234(b) for
quantities that are sent to sale or through the facility and determined
by using best available data for other quantities. If a quantity
required to be reported is zero, you must report zero as the value.
(1) For onshore petroleum and natural gas production, report the
data specified in paragraphs (aa)(1)(i) and (iv) of this section.
(i) Report the information specified in paragraphs (aa)(1)(i)(A)
through (D) of this section for the basin as a whole, unless otherwise
specified.
* * * * *
(B) The quantity of natural gas produced from producing wells that
is sent to sale in the calendar year, in thousand standard cubic feet.
(C) The quantity of crude oil produced from producing wells that is
sent to sale in the calendar year, in barrels.
(D) The quantity of condensate produced from producing wells that
is sent to sale in the calendar year, in barrels.
(ii) * * *
(D) The number of producing wells at the end of the calendar year
(exclude only those wells permanently shut-in and plugged).
(E) The number of producing wells acquired during the calendar
year.
(F) The number of producing wells divested during the calendar
year.
(G) The number of wells completed during the calendar year.
(H) The number of wells permanently shut-in and plugged during the
calendar year.
* * * * *
(iii) Report the information specified in paragraphs
(aa)(1)(iii)(A) through (E) of this section for each well located in
the facility.
(A) Well ID number.
(B) Well-pad ID.
(C) For each well permanently shut-in and plugged during the
calendar year, the quantity of natural gas produced that is sent to
sale in the calendar year, in thousand standard cubic feet.
(D) For each well permanently shut-in and plugged during the
calendar year, the quantity of crude oil produced that is sent to sale
in the calendar year, in barrels.
(E) For each well permanently shut-in and plugged during the
calendar year, the quantity of condensate produced that is sent to sale
in the calendar year, in barrels.
(iv) Report the information specified in paragraphs (aa)(1)(iv)(A)
through (F) of this section for each well-pad located in the facility.
(A) A unique name or ID number for the well-pad.
(B) Sub-basin ID.
(C) The latitude and longitude of the well-pad representing the
geographic centroid or center point of the well-pad in decimal degrees
to at least four digits to the right of the decimal point.
(D) For each well-pad with a well that was permanently shut-in and
plugged during the calendar year, report the quantity of gas produced
from all producing wells on the well-pad that is sent to sale in the
calendar year, in thousand standard cubic feet.
(E) For each well-pad with a well that was permanently shut-in and
plugged during the calendar year, report the quantity of crude oil
produced from all producing wells on the well-pad that is sent to sale
in the calendar year for sales, in barrels.
(F) For each well-pad with a well that was permanently shut-in and
plugged during the calendar year, report the quantity of condensate
produced from all producing wells on the well-pad that is sent to sale
in the calendar year, in barrels.
(2) For offshore production, report the quantities specified in
paragraphs (aa)(2)(i) through (vi) of this section.
(i) The quantity of natural gas produced from producing wells that
is sent to sale in the calendar year, in thousand standard cubic feet.
[[Page 50435]]
(ii) The quantity of crude oil produced from producing wells that
is sent to sale in the calendar year, in barrels.
(iii) The quantity of condensate produced from producing wells that
is sent to sale in the calendar year, in barrels.
(iv) For each well permanently shut-in and plugged during the
calendar year, the quantity of natural gas produced that is sent to
sale in the calendar year, in thousand standard cubic feet.
(v) For each well permanently shut-in and plugged during the
calendar year, the quantity of crude oil produced that is sent to sale
in the calendar year, in barrels.
(vi) For each well permanently shut-in and plugged during the
calendar year, the quantity of condensate produced that is sent to sale
in the calendar year, in barrels.
(3) For natural gas processing, if your facility fractionates NGLs
and also reports as a supplier to subpart NN of this part, you must
report the information specified in paragraphs (aa)(3)(ii) and
(aa)(3)(v) through (ix) of this section. Otherwise, report the
information specified in paragraphs (aa)(3)(i) through (ix) of this
section.
(i) The quantity of natural gas received at the gas processing
plant for processing in the calendar year, in thousand standard cubic
feet.
* * * * *
(viii) Indicate whether the facility reports as a supplier to
subpart NN of this part.
(ix) The quantity of residue gas leaving that has been processed by
the facility and any gas that passes through the facility to sales
without being processed by the facility.
(4) * * *
(i) The quantity of natural gas transported through the compressor
station in the calendar year, in thousand standard cubic feet.
* * * * *
(5) * * *
(ii) The quantity of natural gas withdrawn from storage and sent to
sale in the calendar year, in thousand standard cubic feet.
* * * * *
(6) For LNG import equipment, report the quantity of LNG imported
that is sent to sale in the calendar year, in thousand standard cubic
feet.
(7) For LNG export equipment, report the quantity of LNG exported
that is sent to sale in the calendar year, in thousand standard cubic
feet.
(8) * * *
(ii) The quantity of LNG withdrawn from storage and sent to sale in
the calendar year, in thousand standard cubic feet.
* * * * *
(10) For onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
facilities, report the quantities specified in paragraphs (aa)(10)(i)
through (v) of this section.
* * * * *
(ii) The quantity of natural gas transported through the facility
to a downstream endpoint such as a natural gas processing facility, a
natural gas transmission pipeline, a natural gas distribution pipeline,
a storage facility, or another gathering and boosting facility in the
calendar year, in thousand standard cubic feet.
* * * * *
(iv) The quantity of all hydrocarbon liquids transported to a
downstream endpoint such as a natural gas processing facility, a
natural gas transmission pipeline, a natural gas distribution pipeline,
a storage facility, or another gathering and boosting facility in the
calendar year, in barrels.
(v) Report the information specified in paragraphs (aa)(10)(v)(A)
through (E) of this section for each gathering and boosting site
located in the facility.
(A) A unique name or ID number for the gathering and boosting site.
(B) Gathering and boosting site type (gathering compressor station,
centralized oil production site, gathering pipeline, or other fence-
line site).
(C) State.
(D) For gathering compressor stations, centralized oil production
sites, and other fence-line sites, county.
(E) For gathering compressor stations, centralized oil production
sites, and other fence-line sites, the latitude and longitude of the
gathering and boosting site representing the geographic centroid or
center point of the site in decimal degrees to at least four digits to
the right of the decimal point.
(11) * * *
(ii) The quantity of natural gas withdrawn from underground natural
gas storage and LNG storage (regasification) facilities owned and
operated by the onshore natural gas transmission pipeline owner or
operator that are not subject to this subpart in the calendar year, in
thousand standard cubic feet.
(iii) The quantity of natural gas added to underground natural gas
storage and LNG storage (liquefied) facilities owned and operated by
the onshore natural gas transmission pipeline owner or operator that
are not subject to this subpart in the calendar year, in thousand
standard cubic feet.
(iv) The quantity of natural gas transported through the facility
and transferred to third parties such as LDCs or other transmission
pipelines, in thousand standard cubic feet.
* * * * *
(bb) Missing data. For any missing data procedures used, report the
information in Sec. 98.3(c)(8) and the procedures used to substitute
an unavailable value of a parameter, except as provided in paragraphs
(bb)(1) and (2) of this section.
* * * * *
(cc) Delay in reporting for wildcat wells and delineation wells. If
you elect to delay reporting the information in paragraph (g)(5)(i) or
(ii), (g)(5)(iii)(A) or (B), (h)(1)(iv), (h)(2)(iv), (j)(1)(iii),
(j)(2)(i)(A), (l)(1)(v), (l)(2)(v), (l)(3)(iv), (l)(4)(iv), or (m)(5)
or (6) of this section, you must report the information required in
that paragraph no later than the date 2 years following the date
specified in Sec. 98.3(b) introductory text.
(dd) Drilling mud degassing. You must indicate whether there were
mud degassing operations at your facility, and if so, which methods (as
specified in Sec. 98.233(dd)) were used to calculate emissions. For
wells for which your facility performed mud degassing operations and
used Calculation Method 1, then you must report the information
specified in paragraph (dd)(1) of this section. For wells for which
your facility performed mud degassing operations and used Calculation
Method 2, then you must report the information specified in paragraph
(dd)(2) of this section.
(1) For each well for which you used Calculation Method 1 to
calculate natural gas emissions from mud degassing, report the
information specified in paragraphs (dd)(1)(i) through (vii) of this
section.
(i) Well ID number.
(ii) Approximate total depth below surface, in feet.
(iii) Total time that drilling mud is circulated in the well, in
minutes.
(iv) The composition of the drilling mud: water-based, oil-based,
or synthetic.
(v) If the well is not a representative well, Well ID number of the
representative well used to derive the CH4 emission rate
used to calculate CH4 emissions for this well.
(vi) If the well is a representative well, report the information
specified in paragraphs (dd)(1)(vi)(A) through (D) of this section.
(A) Average mud rate, in gallons per minute.
(B) Concentration of natural gas in the drilling mud (Xn
in Equation W-41), in parts per million.
[[Page 50436]]
(C) Measured mole fraction for CH4 in natural gas
entrained in the drilling mud (GHGCH4 in Equation W-41).
(D) Calculated CH4 emissions rate in standard cubic per
minute (ERs,CH4,r in Equation W-42).
(vii) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons
CH4, from well drilling mud degassing, calculated according
to Sec. 98.233(dd)(1).
(2) For each well for which you used Calculation Method 2 to
calculate natural gas emissions from mud degassing, report the
information specified in paragraphs (dd)(2)(i) through (iv) of this
section.
(i) Well ID number.
(ii) Total number of drilling days.
(iii) The composition of the drilling mud: water-based, oil-based,
or synthetic.
(iv) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons
CH4, from drilling mud degassing, calculated according to
Sec. 98.233(dd)(2).
(ee) Crankcase vents. You must indicate whether your facility
performs any crankcase venting from reciprocating internal combustion
engines or gas turbines. If your facility contains at least one
crankcase vent on an applicable engine, you must report the information
specified in paragraphs (ee)(1) through (4) of this section for each
well-pad (for onshore petroleum and natural gas production), gathering
and boosting site (for onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and
boosting), or facility (for all other applicable industry segments).
(1) Well-pad ID (for the onshore petroleum and natural gas
production industry segment only) or gathering and boosting site ID
(for the onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting
industry segment only).
(2) Total number of crankcase vents at the well-pad, gathering and
boosting site, or facility, as applicable (``Count'' in Equation W-45
of this subpart).
(3) Average estimated time that the reciprocating internal
combustion engines or gas turbines with crankcase venting were
operational in the calendar year, in hours (``T'' in Equation W-45 of
this subpart).
(4) Annual CH4 emissions, in metric tons CH4,
calculated according to Sec. 98.233(ee)(1).
0
16. Amend Sec. 98.238 by:
0
a. Removing the definition for ``Acid gas removal vent emissions'' and
adding the definition for ``Acid gas removal unit (AGR) vent
emissions'' in alphabetical order;
0
b. Adding definitions for ``Atmospheric pressure storage tank,''
``Automated liquids unloading,'' and ``Centralized oil production
site'' in alphabetical order;
0
c. Revising the definitions for ``Compressor mode'' and ``Compressor
source'';
0
d. Adding definitions for ``Crankcase venting,'' ``Drilling mud,'' and
``Drilling mud degassing'' in alphabetical order;
0
e. Removing the second definition for ``Facility with respect to
natural gas distribution for purposes of reporting under this subpart
and for the corresponding subpart A requirements'';
0
f. Revising the definitions for ``Flare stack emissions'' and ``Forced
extraction of natural gas liquids'';
0
g. Adding the definition for ``Gathering and boosting site'' in
alphabetical order;
0
h. Revising the definitions for ``Gathering and boosting system'' and
``Gathering and boosting system owner or operator''; and
0
i. Adding definitions for ``Gathering compressor station,'' ``Gathering
pipeline site,'' ``In vacuum service,'' ``Manual liquids unloading,''
``Mud rate,'' ``Nitrogen removal unit (NRU),'' ``Nitrogen removal unit
vent emissions,'' ``Other large release event,'' ``Produced water,''
``Routed to combustion,'' ``Well blowout,'' and ``Well release'' in
alphabetical order.
The additions and revisions read as follows:
Sec. 98.238 Definitions.
* * * * *
Acid gas removal unit (AGR) vent emissions mean the acid gas
separated from the acid gas absorbing medium (e.g., an amine solution)
and released with methane and other light hydrocarbons to the
atmosphere or a flare.
* * * * *
Atmospheric pressure storage tank means a vessel (excluding sumps)
operating at atmospheric pressure that is designed to contain an
accumulation of crude oil, condensate, intermediate hydrocarbon
liquids, or produced water and that is constructed entirely of non-
earthen materials (e.g., wood, concrete, steel, plastic) that provide
structural support. Atmospheric pressure storage tanks include both
fixed roof tanks and floating roof tanks. Floating roof tanks include
tanks with either an internal floating roof or an external floating
roof.
Automated liquids unloading means an unloading that is performed
without manual interference. Examples of automated liquids unloadings
include a timing and/or pressure device used to optimize intermittent
shut-in of the well before liquids choke off gas flow or to open and
close valves, continually operating equipment that does not require
presence of an operator such as rod pumping units, automated and
unmanned plunger lifts, or other unloading activities that do not
entail a physical presence at the well-pad.
* * * * *
Centralized oil production site means any permanent combination of
one or more hydrocarbon liquids storage tanks located on one or more
contiguous or adjacent properties that does not also contain a
permanent combination of one or more compressors that are part of the
onshore petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting facility that
gathers hydrocarbon liquids from multiple well-pads. A centralized oil
production site is a type of gathering and boosting site for purposes
of reporting under Sec. 98.236.
* * * * *
Compressor mode means the operational and pressurized status of a
compressor. For both centrifugal compressors and reciprocating
compressors, ``mode'' refers to either: Operating-mode, standby-
pressurized-mode, or not-operating-depressurized-mode.
Compressor source means the source of certain venting or leaking
emissions from a centrifugal or reciprocating compressor. For
centrifugal compressors, ``source'' refers to blowdown valve leakage
through the blowdown vent, unit isolation valve leakage through an open
blowdown vent without blind flanges, wet seal oil degassing vents, and
dry seal vents. For reciprocating compressors, ``source'' refers to
blowdown valve leakage through the blowdown vent, unit isolation valve
leakage through an open blowdown vent without blind flanges, and rod
packing emissions.
* * * * *
Crankcase venting means the process of venting or removing blow-by
from the void spaces of an internal combustion engine outside of the
combustion cylinders to prevent excessive pressure build-up within the
engine. This does not include ingestive systems that vent blow-by into
the engine where it is returned to the combustion process.
* * * * *
Drilling mud means a mixture of clays and additives with water,
oil, or synthetic materials. While drilling, the drilling mud is
continuously pumped through the drill string and out the bit to cool
and lubricate the drill bit, and move cuttings through the wellbore to
the surface.
Drilling mud degassing means the practice of safely removing
pockets of free gas entrained in the drilling mud once it is outside of
the wellbore.
* * * * *
[[Page 50437]]
Flare stack emissions means CO2 in gas routed to a
flare, CO2 from partial combustion of hydrocarbons in gas
routed to a flare, CH4 emissions resulting from the
incomplete combustion of hydrocarbons in gas routed to a flare, and
N2O resulting from operation of a flare.
Forced extraction of natural gas liquids means removal of ethane or
higher carbon number hydrocarbons existing in the vapor phase in
natural gas, by removing ethane or heavier hydrocarbons derived from
natural gas into natural gas liquids by means of a forced extraction
process. Forced extraction processes include but are not limited to
refrigeration, absorption (lean oil), cryogenic expander, and
combinations of these processes. Forced extraction does not include in
and of itself; natural gas dehydration, the collection or gravity
separation of water or hydrocarbon liquids from natural gas at ambient
temperature or heated above ambient temperatures, the condensation of
water or hydrocarbon liquids through passive reduction in pressure or
temperature, a Joule-Thomson valve, a dew point depression valve, or an
isolated or standalone Joule-Thomson skid.
Gathering and boosting site means a single gathering compressor
station as defined in this section, centralized oil production site as
defined in this section, gathering pipeline site as defined in this
section, or other fence-line site within the onshore petroleum and
natural gas gathering and boosting industry segment.
Gathering and boosting system means a single network of pipelines,
compressors and process equipment, including equipment to perform
natural gas compression, dehydration, and acid gas removal, that has
one or more connection points to gas and oil production or one or more
other gathering and boosting systems and a downstream endpoint,
typically a gas processing plant, transmission pipeline, LDC pipeline,
or other gathering and boosting system.
Gathering and boosting system owner or operator means any person
that holds a contract in which they agree to transport petroleum or
natural gas from one or more onshore petroleum and natural gas
production wells or one or more other gathering and boosting systems to
a natural gas processing facility, another gathering and boosting
system, a natural gas transmission pipeline, or a distribution
pipeline, or any person responsible for custody of the petroleum or
natural gas transported.
Gathering compressor station means any permanent combination of one
or more compressors located on one or more contiguous or adjacent
properties that are part of the onshore petroleum and natural gas
gathering and boosting facility that move natural gas at increased
pressure through gathering pipelines or into or out of storage. A
gathering compressor station is a type of gathering and boosting site
for purposes of reporting under Sec. 98.236.
Gathering pipeline site means all of the gathering pipelines within
a single state. A gathering pipeline site is a type of gathering and
boosting site for purposes of reporting under Sec. 98.236.
* * * * *
In vacuum service means equipment operating at an internal pressure
which is at least 5 kilopascals (kPa) (0.7 psia) below ambient
pressure.
* * * * *
Manual liquids unloading means an unloading when field personnel
attend to the well at the well-pad, for example to manually plunge a
well at the site using a rig or other method, to open a valve to direct
flow to an atmospheric tank to clear the well, or to manually shut-in
the well to allow pressure to build in the well-bore. Manual unloadings
may be performed on a routine schedule or on ``as needed'' basis.
* * * * *
Mud rate means the pumping rate of the mud by the mud pumps,
usually measured in gallons per minute (gpm).
* * * * *
Nitrogen removal unit (NRU) means a process unit that separates
nitrogen from natural gas using various separation processes (e.g.,
cryogenic units, membrane units, etc.)
Nitrogen removal unit vent emissions means the nitrogen gas
separated from the natural gas and released with methane and other
gases to the atmosphere, flare, or other combustion unit.
* * * * *
Other large release event means any planned or unplanned
uncontrolled release to the atmosphere of gas, liquids, or mixture
thereof, from wells and/or other equipment that result in emissions for
which there are no methodologies in Sec. 98.233 other than under Sec.
98.233(y) to appropriately estimate these emissions. Other large
release events include, but are not limited to, well blowouts, well
releases, pressure relief valve releases from process equipment other
than hydrocarbon liquids storage tanks, storage tank cleaning and other
maintenance activities, and releases that occur as a result of an
accident, equipment rupture, fire, or explosion. Other large release
events also include failure of equipment or equipment components such
that a single equipment leak or release has emissions that exceed the
emissions calculated for that source using applicable methods in Sec.
98.233(a) through (s), (w), (x), (dd), or (ee) by the threshold in
Sec. 98.233(y)(1)(ii).
* * * * *
Produced water means the water (brine) brought up from the
hydrocarbon-bearing strata during the extraction of oil and gas, and
can include formation water, injection water, and any chemicals added
downhole or during the oil/water separation process.
* * * * *
Routed to combustion means, for onshore petroleum and natural gas
production facilities, natural gas distribution facilities, and onshore
petroleum and natural gas gathering and boosting facilities, that
emissions are routed to stationary or portable fuel combustion
equipment specified in Sec. 98.232(c)(22), (i)(7), or (j)(12), as
applicable. For all other industry segments in this subpart, routed to
combustion means that emissions are routed to a stationary fuel
combustion unit subject to subpart C of this part (General Stationary
Fuel Combustion Sources).
* * * * *
Well blowout means a complete loss of well control for a long
duration of time resulting in an emissions release.
* * * * *
Well release means a short duration of uncontrolled emissions
release from a well followed by a period of controlled emissions
release in which control techniques were successfully implemented.
* * * * *
17. Remove table W-1A, table W-1B, table W-1C, table W-1D, and
table W-1E to subpart W of part 98 and add table W-1 to subpart W of
part 98 in numerical order to read as follows:
[[Page 50438]]
Table W-1 to Subpart W of Part 98--Default Whole Gas Population Emission
Factors
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission factor
Industry segment Source type/component (scf whole gas/
hour/unit)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Population Emission Factors--Pneumatic Device Vents and Pneumatic Pumps,
Gas Service 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Onshore petroleum and Continuous Low Bleed 6.8
natural gas production. Pneumatic Device 21
Onshore petroleum and Vents 2.
natural gas gathering and Continuous High Bleed
boosting. Pneumatic Device
Vents 2.
Pneumatic Pumps 3.... 13.3
Onshore natural gas Continuous Low Bleed 6.8
processing. Pneumatic Device
Vents 2.
Onshore natural gas Continuous High Bleed 30
transmission compression. Pneumatic Device
Vents 2.
Underground natural
gas storage.
Natural gas
distribution.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Population Emission Factors--Major Equipment, Gas Service 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Onshore petroleum and Wellhead............. 8.87
natural gas production. Separator............ 9.65
Onshore petroleum and Meters/Piping........ 7.04
natural gas gathering and Compressor........... 13.8
boosting.
Dehydrator........... 8.09
Heater............... 5.22
Storage Vessel....... 1.83
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Population Emission Factors--Major Equipment, Crude Service
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Onshore petroleum and natural Wellhead............. 4.13
gas production. Separator............ 4.77
Meters/Piping........ 12.4
Compressor........... 13.8
Dehydrator........... 8.09
Heater............... 3.2
Storage Vessel....... 1.91
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Population Emission Factors--Gathering Pipelines, by Material Type 4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Onshore petroleum and natural Protected Steel...... 0.93
gas gathering and boosting. Unprotected Steel.... 8.2
Plastic/Composite.... 0.28
Cast Iron............ 8.4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For multi-phase flow that includes gas, use the gas service emission
factors.
\2\ Emission factor is in units of ``scf whole gas/hour/device.''
\3\ Emission factor is in units of ``scf whole gas/hour/pump.''
\4\ Emission factors are in units of ``scf whole gas/hour/mile of
pipeline.''
0
18. Revise table W-2 to subpart W of part 98 to read as follows:
Table W-2 to Subpart W of Part 98--Default Whole Gas Leaker Emission Factors
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission factor (scf whole gas/hour/component)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you survey using If you survey using If you survey using any
Equipment components Method 21 as specified Method 21 as specified of the methods in Sec.
in Sec. in Sec. 98.234(a)(1), (3), or
98.234(a)(2)(i) 98.234(a)(2)(ii) (5)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leaker Emission Factors--Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production and Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas
Gathering and Boosting--All Components, Gas Service
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valve................................ 9.6 5.5 16
Flange............................... 6.9 4.0 11
Connector (other).................... 4.9 2.8 7.9
Open-Ended Line 2.................... 6.3 3.6 10
Pressure Relief Valve................ 7.8 4.5 13
Pump Seal............................ 14 8.3 23
Other 3.............................. 9.1 5.3 15
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leaker Emission Factors--Onshore Petroleum and Natural Gas Production--All Components, Oil Service
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valve................................ 5.6 3.3 9.2
Flange............................... 2.7 1.6 4.4
Connector (other).................... 5.6 3.2 9.1
[[Page 50439]]
Open-Ended Line...................... 1.6 0.93 2.6
Pump 4............................... 3.7 2.2 6.0
Other 3.............................. 2.2 1.0 2.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For multi-phase flow that includes gas, use the gas service emission factors.
\2\ The open-ended lines component type includes blowdown valve and isolation valve leaks emitted through the
blowdown vent stack for centrifugal and reciprocating compressors.
\3\ ``Others'' category includes any equipment leak emission point not specifically listed in this table, as
specified in Sec. 98.232(c)(21) and (j)(10).
\4\ The pumps component type in oil service includes agitator seals.
0
19. Remove table W-3A and table W-3B to subpart W of part 98 and add
table W-3 to subpart W of part 98 in numerical order to read as
follows:
Table W-3 to Subpart W of Part 98--Default Total Hydrocarbon Population Emission Factors
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission factor (scf total
Industry segment Source type/component hydrocarbon/ hour/
component)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Population Emission Factors--Storage Wellheads, Gas Service
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Underground natural gas storage.............. Connector........................... 0.01
Valve............................... 0.1
Pressure Relief Valve............... 0.17
Open-Ended Line..................... 0.03
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
20. Remove table W-4A and table W-4B to subpart W of part 98 and add
table W-4 to subpart W of part 98 in numerical order to read as
follows:
Table W-4 to Subpart W of Part 98--Default Total Hydrocarbon Leaker Emission Factors
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission factor (scf total hydrocarbon/hour/component)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you survey using If you survey using If you survey using any
Equipment components Method 21 as specified Method 21 as specified of the methods in Sec.
in Sec. in Sec. 98.234(a)(1), (3), or
98.234(a)(2)(i) 98.234(a)(2)(ii) (5)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leaker Emission Factors--Onshore Natural Gas Processing, Onshore Natural Gas Transmission Compression--
Compressor Components, Gas Service
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valve \1\............................ 14.84 9.51 24.2
Connector............................ 5.59 3.58 9.13
Open-Ended Line...................... 17.27 11.07 28.2
Pressure Relief Valve................ 39.66 25.42 64.8
Meter................................ 19.33 12.39 31.6
Other \2\............................ 4.1 2.63 6.70
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leaker Emission Factors--Onshore Natural Gas Processing, Onshore Natural Gas Transmission Compression--Non-
Compressor Components, Gas Service
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valve \1\............................ 6.42 4.12 10.5
Connector............................ 5.71 3.66 9.3
Open-Ended Line...................... 11.27 7.22 18.4
Pressure Relief Valve................ 2.01 1.29 3.28
Meter................................ 2.93 1.88 4.79
Other \2\............................ 4.1 2.63 6.70
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leaker Emission Factors--Underground Natural Gas Storage--Storage Station, Gas Service
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valve \1\............................ 14.84 9.51 24.2
Connector (other).................... 5.59 3.58 9.13
Open-Ended Line...................... 17.27 11.07 28.2
Pressure Relief Valve................ 39.66 25.42 64.8
Meter and Instrument................. 19.33 12.39 31.6
Other \2\............................ 4.1 2.63 6.70
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 50440]]
Leaker Emission Factors--Underground Natural Gas Storage--Storage Wellheads, Gas Service
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valve\1\............................. 4.5 3.2 7.35
Connector (other than flanges)....... 1.2 0.7 1.96
Flange............................... 3.8 2.0 6.21
Open-Ended Line...................... 2.5 1.7 4.08
Pressure Relief Valve................ 4.1 2.5 6.70
Other \2\............................ 4.1 2.5 6.70
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Valves include control valves, block valves and regulator valves.
\2\ Other includes any potential equipment leak emission point in gas service that is not specifically listed in
this table, as specified in Sec. 98.232(e)(8) for onshore natural gas transmission compression, and as
specified in Sec. 98.232(f)(6) and (8) for underground natural gas storage.
0
21. Remove table W-5A and table W-5B to subpart W of part 98 and add
table W-5 to subpart W of part 98 in numerical order to read as
follows:
Table W-5 to Subpart W of Part 98--Default Methane Population Emission
Factors
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission factor (scf
Industry segment Source type/ methane/hour/
component component)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Population Emission Factors--LNG Storage Compressor, Gas Service
------------------------------------------------------------------------
LNG storage................. Vapor Recovery 4.17
LNG import and export Compressor \1\.
equipment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Population Emission Factors--Below Grade Transmission-Distribution
Transfer Station Components and Below Grade Metering-Regulating Station
\2\ Components, Gas Service
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Natural gas distribution.... Below Grade T-D 0.30
Transfer Station.
Below Grade M&R 0.30
Station.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Population Emission Factors--Distribution Mains, Gas Service
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Natural gas distribution.... Unprotected Steel... 5.1
Protected Steel..... 0.57
Plastic............. 0.17
Cast Iron........... 6.9
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Population Emission Factors--Distribution Services, Gas Service
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Natural gas distribution.... Unprotected Steel... 0.086
Protected Steel..... 0.0077
Plastic............. 0.0016
Copper.............. 0.03
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Population Emission Factors--Interconnect, Direct Sale, or Farm Tap
Station Stations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Onshore natural gas Transmission Company 166
transmission pipeline. Interconnect M&R
Station.
Direct Sale or Farm 1.3
Tap Station.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Population Emission Factors--Transmission Pipelines, Gas Service
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Onshore natural gas Unprotected Steel... 0.74
transmission pipeline.
Protected Steel..... 0.041
Plastic............. 0.061
Cast Iron........... 27
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Emission Factor is in units of ``scf methane/hour/compressor.''
\2\ Excluding customer meters.
\3\ Emission Factor is in units of ``scf methane/hour/station.''
\4\ Emission Factor is in units of ``scf methane/hour/mile.''
\5\ Emission Factor is in units of ``scf methane/hour/number of
services.''
[[Page 50441]]
0
22. Remove table W-6A and table W-6B to subpart W of part 98 and add
table W-6 to subpart W of part 98 in numerical order to read as
follows:
Table W-6 to Subpart W of Part 98--Default Methane Leaker Emission Factors
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission factor (scf methane/hour/component)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you survey using If you survey using If you survey using any
Equipment components Method 21 as specified Method 21 as specified of the methods in Sec.
in Sec. in Sec. 98.234(a)(1), (3), or
98.234(a)(2)(i) 98.234(a)(2)(ii) (5)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leaker Emission Factors--LNG Storage and LNG Import and Export Equipment--Storage Components and Terminals
Components, LNG Service
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valve................................ 1.19 0.23 1.94
Pump Seal............................ 4.00 0.73 6.54
Connector............................ 0.34 0.11 0.56
Other \1\............................ 1.77 0.99 2.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leaker Emission Factors--LNG Storage and LNG Import and Export Equipment--Storage Components and Terminals
Components, Gas Service
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Valve \2\............................ 14.84 9.51 24.2
Connector............................ 5.59 3.58 9.13
Open-Ended Line...................... 17.27 11.07 28.2
Pressure Relief Valve................ 39.66 25.42 64.8
Meter and Instrument................. 19.33 12.39 31.6
Other \3\............................ 4.1 2.63 6.70
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leaker Emission Factors--Natural Gas Distribution--Transmission-Distribution Transfer Station Components, Gas
Service
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Connector............................ 1.69 ....................... 2.76
Block Valve.......................... 0.557 ....................... 0.91
Control Valve........................ 9.34 ....................... 15.3
Pressure Relief Valve................ 0.27 ....................... 0.44
Orifice Meter........................ 0.212 ....................... 0.35
Regulator............................ 0.772 ....................... 1.26
Open-ended Line...................... 26.131 ....................... 42.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``Other'' equipment type for components in LNG service should be applied for any equipment type other than
connectors, pumps, or valves.
\2\ Valves include control valves, block valves and regulator valves.
\3\ ``Other'' equipment type for components in gas service should be applied for any equipment type other than
valves, connectors, flanges, open-ended lines, pressure relief valves, and meters and instruments, as
specified in Sec. 98.232(g)(6) and (7) and Sec. 98.232(h)(7) and (8).
\4\ Excluding customer meters.
0
23. Revise table W-7 to subpart W of part 98 to read as follows:
Table W-7 to Subpart W of Part 98--Default Methane Emission Factors for
Internal Combustion Equipment
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission factor
Internal combustion equipment type (kg CH4/mmBtu)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reciprocating Engine, 2-stroke lean-burn............ 0.658
Reciprocating Engine, 4-stroke lean-burn............ 0.522
Reciprocating Engine, 4-stroke rich-burn............ 0.045
Gas Turbine......................................... 0.004
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2023-14338 Filed 7-31-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P