[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 145 (Thursday, July 31, 2025)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 35966-35985]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-14531]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 60
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2025-0162; FRL-12675-01-OAR]
RIN 2060-AW61
Extension of Deadlines in Standards of Performance for New,
Reconstructed, and Modified Sources and Emissions Guidelines for
Existing Sources: Oil and Natural Gas Sector Climate Review Final Rule
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Interim final rule; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking
interim final action to extend certain deadlines within the final rule
titled ``Standards of Performance for New, Reconstructed, and Modified
Sources and Emissions Guidelines for Existing Sources: Oil and Natural
Gas Sector Climate Review,'' 89 FR 16820 (March 8, 2024) (hereafter
``2024 final rule''). Specifically, the EPA is extending deadlines for
certain provisions related to control devices, equipment leaks, storage
vessels, process controllers, and covers/closed vent systems in
``Subpart
[[Page 35967]]
OOOOb--Standards of Performance for Crude Oil and Natural Gas
Facilities for Which Construction, Modification or Reconstruction
Commenced After December 6, 2022'' (NSPS OOOOb). The EPA also is
extending the date for future implementation of the SuperEmitter
Program. Finally, the EPA is extending the state plan submittal
deadline in ``Subpart OOOOc--Emissions Guidelines (EG) for Greenhouse
Gas Emissions From Existing Crude Oil and Natural Gas Facilities'' (EG
OOOOc). The EPA is requesting comments on all aspects of this interim
final rule and will consider all comments received in determining
whether amendments to this rule are appropriate after the conclusion of
the comment period.
DATES: This interim final rule is effective on July 31, 2025. Comments
on this interim final rule must be received on or before September 2,
2025.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2025-0162, by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov
(our preferred method). Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
Email: [email protected]. Include Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-OAR-2025-0162 in the subject line of the message.
Mail: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket
Center, Docket ID No. EPAHQ-OAR-2025-0162, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460.
Hand/Courier Delivery: EPA Docket Center, WJC West
Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004.
The Docket Center's hours of operation are 8:30 a.m.-4:30 p.m., Monday-
Friday (except Federal Holidays). Comments received may be posted
without change to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal
information provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments,
see the ``Public Participation'' heading of the General Information
section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Hambrick, Sector Policies and
Programs Division (E143-05), 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, P.O. Box 12055,
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, United States
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711; telephone number: (919) 541-0964; and email address:
[email protected]. Individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing, as
well as individuals who have speech or communication disabilities may
use a relay service. To learn more about how to make an accessible
telephone call to any of the numbers shown in this document, visit the
web page for the relay service of the Federal Communications
Commission. Additional questions may be directed to the following email
address: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Preamble acronyms and abbreviations. Throughout this document the
use of ``we,'' ``us,'' or ``our'' is intended to refer to the EPA. We
use multiple acronyms and terms in this preamble. While this list may
not be exhaustive, to ease the reading of this preamble and for
reference purposes, the EPA defines the following terms and acronyms
here:
APA Administrative Procedure Act
AVO audible, visual, and olfactory
CAA Clean Air Act
CBI Confidential Business Information
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CRA Congressional Review Act
CVS closed vent systems
ECD enclosed combustion device
EG emissions guidelines
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FR Federal Register
GC gas chromatograph
GHG greenhouse gas
LPE legally and practicably enforceable
Mcf thousand cubic feet
MS mass spectrometer
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NIE no identifiable emissions
NHV net heating value
NHVcz combustion zone net heating value
NHVdil dilution parameter net heating value
NSPS new source performance standards
OGI optical gas imaging
OMB Office of Management and Budget
ppmv parts per million by volume
PRA Paperwork Reduction Act
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
RULOF remaining useful life and other factors
SEP super emitter program
SIP state implementation plan
TOC total organic compounds
tpy tons per year
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
U.S.C. United States Code
VOC volatile organic compound(s)
Organization of this document. The information in this preamble is
organized as follows:
I. General Information
A. Public Participation
B. Potentially Affected Entities
C. Statutory Authority
D. Judicial Review and Administrative Review
II. Regulatory Revisions
A. Background and Summary
B. Deadline Extensions for NSPS OOOOb
C. Deadline Extensions for EG OOOOc
III. Rulemaking Procedures
IV. Request for Comment
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
B. Executive Order 14192: Unleashing Prosperity Through
Deregulation
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) and
1 CFR Part 51
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
I. General Information
A. Public Participation
Submit your written comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2025-0162, at https://www.regulations.gov (our preferred method),
or by 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 https://www.regulations.gov any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. This
type of information should be submitted as discussed in the Submitting
CBI section of this document. 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). Please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets for additional submission
methods; the full EPA public comment policy; information about CBI or
multimedia submissions; and general guidance on making effective
comments.
Submitting CBI. Do not submit information containing CBI to the EPA
through https://www.regulations.gov. Clearly mark the part or all the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI on any digital storage
media
[[Page 35968]]
that you mail to the EPA, note the docket ID, mark the outside of the
digital storage media as CBI, and identify electronically within the
digital storage media the specific information that is claimed as CBI.
In addition to one complete version of the comments that includes
information claimed as CBI, you must submit a copy of the comments that
does not contain the information claimed as CBI directly to the public
docket through the procedures outlined in the Public Participation
section of this document. If you submit any digital storage media that
does not contain CBI, mark the outside of the digital storage media
clearly that it does not contain CBI and note the docket ID.
Information not marked as CBI will be included in the public docket and
the EPA's electronic public docket without prior notice. Information
marked as CBI will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 2.
Our preferred method to receive CBI is for it to be transmitted
electronically using email attachments, File Transfer Protocol (FTP),
or other online file sharing services (e.g., Dropbox, OneDrive, Google
Drive). Electronic submissions must be transmitted directly to the
OAQPS CBI Office at the email address [email protected], and as
described above, should include clear CBI markings, and note the docket
ID. If assistance is needed with submitting large electronic files that
exceed the file size limit for email attachments, and if you do not
have your own file sharing service, please email [email protected] to
request a file transfer link. If sending CBI information through the
postal service, please send it to the following address: OAQPS Document
Control Officer (C404-02), OAQPS, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
109 T.W. Alexander Drive, P.O. Box 12055, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina 27711, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2025-0162. The
mailed CBI material should be double wrapped and clearly marked. Any
CBI markings should not show through the outer envelope.
B. Potentially Affected Entities
The source category that is the subject of this action is the Crude
Oil and Natural Gas source category, regulated under Clean Air Act
(CAA) section 111. The North American Industry Classification System
(NAICS) codes for the industrial source categories affected by the new
source performance standards (NSPS) portion of this action are
summarized in table 1.
Table 1--Industrial Source Categories Affected by the NSPS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of regulated
Category NAICS code \1\ entities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industry....................... 211120 Crude Petroleum
Extraction.
211130 Natural Gas Extraction.
221210 Natural Gas
Distribution.
486110 Pipeline Distribution
of Crude Oil.
486210 Pipeline Transportation
of Natural Gas.
Federal Government............. .............. Not affected.
State and Local Government..... .............. Not affected.
Tribal Government.............. 921150 American Indian and
Alaska Native Tribal
Governments.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ North American Industry Classification System (NAICS).
This table is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather to provide
a guide for readers regarding entities likely to be affected by the
deadline extensions. Other types of entities not listed in the table
could also be affected by this action. To determine whether your entity
is affected by any of the deadline extensions in this action, you
should carefully examine the applicability criteria found in NSPS
OOOOb. If you have questions regarding the applicability of this action
to a particular entity, consult the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section.
The deadline extensions in EG OOOOc does not impose binding
requirements directly on existing sources. The EG codified in 40 CFR
part 60, subpart OOOOc, applies to states in the development,
submittal, and implementation of state plans to establish performance
standards to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) from designated
facilities that are existing sources on or before December 6, 2022.
Under the Tribal Authority Rule (TAR), eligible tribes may seek
approval to implement a plan under CAA section 111(d) in a manner
similar to a state. See 40 CFR part 49, subpart A. Tribes may, but are
not required to, seek approval for treatment in a manner similar to a
state for purposes of developing a tribal implementation plan (TIP)
implementing the EG codified in 40 CFR part 60, subpart OOOOc. The TAR
authorizes tribes to develop and implement their own air quality
programs, or portions thereof, under the CAA. However, it does not
require tribes to develop a CAA program. Tribes may implement programs
that are most relevant to their air quality needs. If a tribe does not
seek and obtain the authority from the EPA to establish a TIP, the EPA
has the authority to establish a Federal CAA section 111(d) plan for
designated facilities that are located in areas of Indian country.\1\ A
Federal plan would apply to all designated facilities located in the
areas of Indian country covered by the Federal plan unless and until
the EPA approves a TIP applicable to those facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See the EPA's website, https://www.epa.gov/tribal/tribes-approved-treatment-state-tas, for information on those tribes that
have treatment as a state for specific environmental regulatory
programs, administrative functions, and grant programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Statutory Authority
Statutory authority to issue the amendments finalized in this
action is provided by the same CAA provisions that provided authority
to issue the regulations being amended: CAA section 111(b)(1)(B)
(requirement to review, and if appropriate, revise, standards of
performance for new sources at least every 8 years) and CAA section
111(d) (requirement to issue EG for existing sources for certain
pollutants to which a NSPS would apply if such existing source were a
new source). These statutory provisions, along with administrative
agencies' authority to reconsider prior regulations, provide the EPA's
statutory authority for the targeted amendments to compliance deadlines
finalized in this action.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See FDA v. Wages & White Lion Invs., LLC, 145 S. Ct. 898
(2025); FCC v. Fox TV Stations, Inc., 556 U.S. 502 (2009); Motor
Vehicle Mfrs. Ass'n v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 463 U.S. 29
(1983).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 35969]]
Statutory authority for the rulemaking procedures followed in this
action is provided by Administrative Procedure Act (APA) section
553(b)(B), 5 United States Code (U.S.C.) 553(b)(B) (good cause
exception to notice-and-comment rulemaking), and statutory authority
for making this action, which meets the criteria under 5 U.S.C. 804(2),
effectively immediately is provided by 5 U.S.C. 808(2). As explained in
section III of this preamble, the EPA finds good cause to forego prior
notice and comment because such procedures are unnecessary and
impracticable under the circumstances detailed in section II of this
preamble.
D. Judicial Review and Administrative Review
Under CAA section 307(b)(1), judicial review of this final action
is available only by filing a petition for review in the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit by September 29,
2025. Under CAA section 307(b)(2), the requirements established by this
final action may not be challenged separately in any civil or criminal
proceedings brought by the EPA to enforce the requirements.
II. Regulatory Revisions
A. Background and Summary
On November 15, 2021, the EPA published a proposed rule (``November
2021 Proposal'') to reduce GHG and volatile organic compound (VOC)
emissions from the oil and natural gas industry,\3\ specifically the
Crude Oil and Natural Gas source category.4 5 In the
November 2021 Proposal, the EPA proposed revised standards of
performance under CAA section 111(b) for GHG and VOC emissions from
new, modified, and reconstructed sources in this source category, as
well as changes to standards of performance already codified at 40 CFR
part 60, subparts OOOO and OOOOa. The EPA also proposed EG under CAA
section 111(d) for GHG emissions from existing sources.\6\ The EPA also
updated the NSPS OOOO and NSPS OOOOa provisions in the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) in response to Congress' disapproval of the EPA's
final rule titled, ``Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for
New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources Review,'' September 14, 2020
(``2020 Policy Rule''), under the CRA. Lastly, the EPA proposed a
protocol under the NSPS general provisions for optical gas imaging
(OGI).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The EPA characterizes the oil and natural gas industry
operations as being generally composed of 4 segments: (1) Extraction
and production of crude oil and natural gas (``oil and natural gas
production''), (2) natural gas processing, (3) natural gas
transmission and storage, and (4) natural gas distribution.
\4\ ``Standards of Performance for New, Reconstructed, and
Modified Sources and Emissions Guidelines for Existing Sources: Oil
and Natural Gas Sector Climate Review.'' Proposed rule. 86 FR 63110
(November 15, 2021).
\5\ The EPA defines the Crude Oil and Natural Gas source
category to mean: (1) crude oil production, which includes the well
and extends to the point of custody transfer to the crude oil
transmission pipeline or any other forms of transportation; and (2)
natural gas production, processing, transmission, and storage, which
include the well and extend to, but do not include, the local
distribution company custody transfer station, commonly referred to
as the ``city-gate.''
\6\ The term ``designated facility'' means ``any existing
facility which emits a designated pollutant and which would be
subject to a standard of performance for that pollutant if the
existing facility were an affected facility.'' See 40 CFR 60.21a(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On December 6, 2022, the EPA published a supplemental proposed rule
(``December 2022 Supplemental Proposal'') that was composed of two main
additions.\7\ First, the EPA proposed to update, tighten, and expand
the NSPS OOOOb standards proposed in November 2021 under CAA section
111(b) for GHG and VOC emissions from new, modified, and reconstructed
sources. Second, the EPA proposed to update, tighten, and expand the EG
OOOOc presumptive standards proposed in November 2021 under CAA section
111(d) for GHG emissions from existing sources. For purposes of EG
OOOOc, the EPA also proposed implementation requirements for state
plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ ``Standards of Performance for New, Reconstructed, and
Modified Sources and Emissions Guidelines for Existing Sources: Oil
and Natural Gas Sector Climate Review.'' Supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking. 87 FR 74702 (December 6, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 8, 2024, the EPA published a final rule for the Crude Oil
and Natural Gas source category under CAA section 111(b) and (d).
First, the EPA finalized NSPS OOOOb for GHG and VOC emissions from new,
modified, and reconstructed sources in this source category. Second,
the EPA finalized EG OOOOc for GHG emissions from existing sources in
this source category. Third, the EPA finalized various amendments in
response to Congress' disapproval of the 2020 Policy Rule. The 2024
final rule became effective on May 7, 2024.
After publication of the 2024 final rule, the EPA received multiple
petitions for reconsideration and has now determined, through ongoing
and recent communications with stakeholders and review of the relevant
regulatory language, that certain discrete provisions in the final rule
present immediate problems related to compliance. The issues raised in
petitions for reconsideration that are relevant to this interim final
rule are described in individual sections below. In this action, the
EPA is amending certain compliance deadlines and timeframes for
implementation in response to information received after promulgation
of the 2024 final rule to address legitimate concerns, raised by
stakeholders, that certain regulatory provisions are not currently
workable or contain problematic regulatory language that frustrates
compliance.
The 2024 final rule is extensive, covering many individual
emissions sources of different types at thousands of facilities in the
oil and natural gas source category across the country. As explained in
more detail in the sections below, the 2024 rule included several
provisions that subsequent developments have shown to be untenable from
a compliance perspective on the original timeframes set out in the 2024
rule. These timing difficulties were not anticipated in or intended by
the 2024 rule, and it is in the public interest and consistent with the
purposes of the CAA to provide regulated entities sufficient time to
achieve the emissions reductions envisioned by the 2024 rule. Based on
information received in petitions for reconsideration and from ongoing
conversations with regulated entities, the EPA finds that the targeted
revisions to compliance deadlines set forth below are necessary,
appropriate, and consistent with the purposes of the 2024 rule and the
CAA.
Each regulatory change included in this final action is severable
from the other. First, each of the deadlines amended in this action is
functionally independent from the others--i.e., may operate in practice
independently of the other requirements being amended here, such that
the amendment of a deadline in one set of requirements does not turn on
the amendment of a deadline in any other set of requirements. For
example, amendments to individual compliance deadlines in NSPS OOOOb
function separately from amendments to the state plan submittal
deadline in EG OOOOc. Similarly, amendments to the implementation
deadline for the Super-Emitter Program and amendments to timing for EPA
action on methane detection technology for use in the Super-Emitter
Program function separately from amendments to individual compliance
deadlines to other aspects of the 2024 final rule. Second, as explained
in section II.B of this preamble, the reasoning for each regulatory
change is distinct and independent from the others. For
[[Page 35970]]
example, amendments to individual compliance deadlines in NSPS OOOOb
are separately justified, based on the recent information received by
the Agency, from the amendments made to the state plan submittal
deadline in EG OOOOc based on recent information gathered by the Agency
on a distinct set of issues related to OOOOc. Similarly, amendments to
individual implementation deadlines for the SEP are separately
justified, based on information received by the Agency, from amendments
made in response to information received on distinct compliance issues
under the other provisions of the 2024 final rule.
The EPA continues to review other issues related to the 2024 final
rule that have been brought to the Agency's attention but are not
substantively addressed in this action.8 9 Thus, this action
does not reopen the substance of the 2024 final rule or address the
substantive amendments requested in various petitions for
reconsideration. As noted in section IV of this preamble, the EPA seeks
comment on the compliance deadline amendments at issue in this action
and will consider appropriate revisions in reviewing comments. However,
the EPA does not seek comment on the substance of the 2024 final rule
and will seek and respond to comments on further amendments to the
substance of the 2024 final rule at an appropriate time in future
rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See 90 FR 3734. On January 15, 2025, the EPA proposed
amendments to NSPS OOOOb and EG OOOOc in response to petitions for
reconsideration. The January 2025 proposal includes discrete
technical changes to two aspects of the 2024 final rule. The two
issues addressed in the January 2025 proposal are temporary flaring
provisions for associated gas in certain situations and vent gas NHV
continuous monitoring requirements and alternative performance test
(sampling demonstration) option for flares and ECDs.
\9\ In a press release dated March 12, 2025, the EPA
Administrator announced various reconsideration efforts including
NSPS OOOOb and EG OOOOc. https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/trump-epa-announces-oooo-bc-reconsideration-biden-harris-rules-strangling-american.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Deadline Extensions for NSPS OOOOb 10
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Changes made to the SEP discussed in section II.B.6 of this
preamble also apply to 40 CFR part 60, subparts OOOO and OOOOa.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Control Devices
In the 2024 final rule, the EPA finalized monitoring requirements
for control devices that included vent gas net heating value (NHV)
continuous monitoring requirements and an alternative performance test
(sampling demonstration) option for flares and enclosed combustion
devices (ECDs). In the 2024 final rule, with exceptions for catalytic
vapor incinerators, boilers and process heaters, and enclosed
combustors where temperature is an indicator of destruction efficiency,
all flares and enclosed combustors must maintain the NHV of the gas
sent to the device above a minimum NHV if the combustion device is
pressure-assisted or uses no assist gas. If an owner or operator uses a
steam- or air-assisted flare or ECD, the owner or operator must
maintain the combustion zone NHV (NHVcz) above a minimum
level. If the owner or operator uses an air-assisted enclosed flare or
ECD, the owner or operator must maintain the NHV dilution parameter
(NHVdil) above a minimum level. The NHVcz and
NHVdil parameter terms account for the reduction in heating
value caused by the introduction of air or steam. These terms ensure
that the assist gas does not overwhelm the heating value provided by
the vent gas to the point where proper combustion is no longer
occurring. Owners or operators also have the option to apply to use an
alternative test method that either demonstrates continuous compliance
with the combustion efficiency limit or directly demonstrates
continuous compliance with the NHVcz operating limit and, if
applicable, the NHVdil operating limit.
For each flare or ECD used to control gases other than associated
gas from a well site affected facility, the owner or operator must
conduct continuous monitoring using a calorimeter, gas chromatograph
(GC), or mass spectrometer (MS) in order to determine the NHV of the
vent stream. As an alternative to continuous monitoring of NHV, the
owner or operator may conduct a performance test to demonstrate the NHV
of the vent stream consistently exceeds the applicable NHV operating
limit in one of two ways: (1) Continuous sampling for 14 consecutive
days plus ongoing (3 samples every 5 years) sampling, or (2) manual
sampling (twice daily for 14 consecutive days) plus ongoing (3 samples
every 5 years) sampling. The minimum collection time for each
individual, manually collected sample must be at least 1 hour. If inlet
gas flow is intermittent such that collecting 28 samples in 14 days is
infeasible, an owner or operator must continue to collect samples
beyond 14 days in order to collect a minimum of 28 samples. Owners or
operators also have the option to use an alternative test method
11 12 that demonstrates continuous compliance with the
combustion efficiency limit. If there are no values of the combustion
efficiency measured by the alternative test method over the 14-day
period that are less than 95 percent, the gas stream is considered to
consistently exceed the applicable NHV operating limit, and the owner
or operator is not required to continuously monitor or conduct sampling
of the NHV of the inlet gas to the flare or ECD. Owners or operators of
steam-assisted and air-assisted enclosed combustors and flares also
must monitor the vent gas and assist gas flow rates and calculate
NHVcz and NHVdil in accordance with the
provisions in 40 CFR 63.670 (i.e., the refinery maximum achievable
control technology rule, or Refinery MACT). Alternatively, owners or
operators of air-assisted flares may provide a one-time demonstration
based on maximum air assist rates, minimum waste gas flow rates (based
on back pressure regulator setting), and minimum NHV from the most
recent sampling rather than continuously monitor vent gas and assist
gas flow rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Under the provisions outlined in 40 CFR 60.5412b(d) and
60.5415b(f)(1)(xi), sources can request to use an ``equivalent
method'' pursuant to 40 CFR 60.8(b)(2), or ``an alternative method
the results of which [the Administrator] has determined to be
adequate for indicating whether a specific source is in compliance''
pursuant to 40 CFR 60.8(b)(3). The EPA is currently accepting and
reviewing applications for alternative (ALT) test methods for NHV
monitoring in the oil and natural gas sector. See https://www.epa.gov/emc/oil-andgas-alternative-test-methods#:~:text=The%20application%20portal%20can%20be,Air%20Emission%
20Measurement%20Center%20web page. Since the rule's publication date
of March 8, 2024, two alternative test method requests have been
approved by the EPA for use under NSPS subpart OOOOb: (1) ALT-156
Alternative Test Method to monitor the NHV of the flare combustion
zone at facilities Subject to NSPS OOOOb and (2) ALT-157 Alternative
Test Method for determining NHV from gas sent to an ECD or Flare
subject to NSPS OOOOb. A list of the EPA's approved alternative test
methods can be found at https://www.epa.gov/emc/broadlyapplicable-approved-alternative-test-methods.
\12\ Per 40 CFR 60.8(b)(5), the EPA has more general authority
to approve alternative test methods involving ``shorter sampling
times and smaller sample volumes when necessitated by process
variables or other factors.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Multiple petitions for reconsideration and communications with
stakeholders after promulgation of the 2024 final rule raised concerns
regarding the availability of equipment and personnel necessary \13\ to
comply with the NHV provisions in the 2024 final rule. Due to the
thousands of control devices immediately subject to the OOOOb NHV
requirements, number of samples required to be taken, and existing
supply chain constraints for monitoring equipment and sampling
vendors,\14\ petitioners have credibly asserted that
[[Page 35971]]
compliance would be very challenging to achieve within the compliance
timeline.\15\ Moreover, petitioners credibly asserted that even if the
samples could be taken within the prescribed period, there is also
insufficient analytical laboratory capacity to conduct the necessary
analyses for each sample in a timely manner. One of the petitioners
stated that vent gas flow from midstream sources to control devices
tends to be sporadic and at low pressure and this is particularly true
for storage vessels that either have low flows generally or have
pressure control valves that only release short bursts of gas to
control devices.\16\ Other stakeholders added that even if continuous
monitoring was technically feasible, there is a lack of available
monitoring equipment,\17\ and that it will take owners and operators
several months to procure continuous monitoring equipment and
installation will take additional time. Furthermore, stakeholders have
credibly asserted that discussions with vendors indicated that
calorimeters would take between 8 to 12 weeks for delivery and
continuous monitoring devices will take up to 26 weeks \18\ with
installation requiring an additional 2 to 3 weeks.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0023 attachment 1 at page 9.
\14\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0016 at page 6.
\15\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0009 at page 1.
\16\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0016 at page 6.
\17\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0020 attachment 3 at page 5.
\18\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0020 attachment 3 at page 13.
\19\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0013 at pages 2-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, one of the petitioners credibly asserted that the
2024 final rule does not provide an adequate period of time to perform
the alternative testing procedures under 40 CFR 60.5412b(d) and does
not provide any time for testing at all, putting owners and operators
at risk of being deemed out of compliance for operating a modified
source before and during testing. The petitioner added that the
alternative testing protocol (40 CFR 60.5312b(d)(1)-(5)) requires the
combustion device to already be operating in order to determine
destruction efficiency and inspect for visible emissions, unlike
continuous monitoring, which can be installed prior to the startup of a
new source. Therefore, petitioners stated that full compliance with the
current deadlines across the industry is not feasible. These concerns
have been reiterated \20\ in public comments submitted by industry
groups on the EPA's proposed reconsideration related to NHV
monitoring.\21\ Commenters have pointed out that testing equipment
requires significant lead times, often multiple months in advance.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0083 at page 16, submitted to the
EPA on March 4, 2025.
\21\ On January 15, 2025, the EPA proposed amendments to the
2024 final rule based on reconsideration of two discrete issues
related to NHV monitoring and temporary flaring. See 90 FR 3734 for
the January 2025 reconsideration proposal. See Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2024-0358 for public comments submitted on the January 2025
reconsideration proposal.
\22\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0046 at page 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the 2024 final rule, in addition to the NHV requirements
described in this section, the EPA also finalized performance testing
requirements for ECDs applicable to well, centrifugal compressor,
reciprocating compressor, storage vessel, process controller, pump, or
process unit equipment affected facilities. These performance test
requirements consist of a minimum of 3 test runs at least 1 hour long
at the inlet of the first control device and at the outlet of the final
control device to determine compliance with a total organic compound
(TOC) percent reduction requirement of 95.0 percent by weight or
greater, or reduce the concentration of TOC in the exhaust gases at the
outlet to the control device to a level equal to or less than 275 ppmv
as propane on a wet basis corrected to 3 percent oxygen.
According to reconsideration petitioners, the performance testing
provisions for ECDs are currently untenable for NSPS OOOOb control
devices. Due to the sheer volume of ECDs that require testing under
NSPS OOOOb, coupled with the limited number of specialized source
testing firms that are available to perform these tests, the
petitioners stated that additional time is needed to conduct
performance testing for ECDs at affected facilities constructed,
modified, or reconstructed since December 6, 2022. The petitioners also
expressed concerns over the workload and backlog for the EPA or
delegated state and local authorities to process alternative
performance testing requests for potentially hundreds of ECD test
programs. The petitioners credibly asserted that relying on delegated
authorities to address performance testing issues provides no solution
on most tribal lands, where the EPA is often the sole agency
responsible for implementing NSPS OOOOb.\23\ Petitioners stated that
while owners and operators utilizing ECDs to comply with standards in a
state or Federal plan under EG OOOOc will likely have years to address
these challenges, these performance testing issues present an immediate
and untenable scenario for NSPS OOOOb control devices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0009 at page 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The petitioners expressed additional concerns over the amount of
time required (i.e., minimum test run duration) and the need for
supplemental gas to conduct three 1-hour test runs on sources that have
intermittent flow (e.g., storage vessels). A testing crew is typically
able to conduct up to two performance tests per day where vapor flow is
sufficient. Where vapor flow is low and/or intermittent, as can be the
case for many storage vessels, it may take multiple days of waiting to
find a window with sufficient flow to accommodate a 1-hour test run,
and in many cases, there will never be sufficient vapor flow to
accommodate a 1-hour test run under normal operating conditions.
Therefore, petitioners stated, performing these tests as prescribed in
the 2024 final rule is not always feasible.
Additionally, petitioners stated the installation of monitoring
equipment or sampling ports on existing ECDs requires specialized ``hot
tap'' work. A ``hot tap'' requires specialized vendors and a site
shutdown to perform this work. This work exacerbates the already
challenging compliance timeline given the existing supply chain
constraints, which will prevent most affected facilities from obtaining
the necessary monitoring equipment, and the large number of needed
retrofits.\24\ Therefore, petitioners said this work cannot be
accomplished across the industry prior to the deadline for compliance
demonstrations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0009 at page 2 and attachment 1 to
the petition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this action, the EPA is extending the compliance dates related
to NHV monitoring of flares and ECDs found in 40 CFR 60.5417b(d)(8)(i)
through (iv) and (vi) by 120 days from publication of this interim
final rule to address the supply chain, personnel, and laboratory
limitations identified by petitioners which make compliance with the
requirements promulgated in the 2024 final rule infeasible. On January
15, 2025, the EPA proposed amendments to the NSPS and EG related to NHV
requirements based on reconsideration petitions. The Agency is working
towards finalizing those amendments and expects a final rule to be
issued soon. Because a separate rulemaking action will address the
substantive problems raised with the NHV provisions in the 2024 final
rule, we have determined that an extension to November 28, 2025 is
sufficient for present purposes. The EPA solicits comments on this
extension of 120 days.
[[Page 35972]]
If, based on comments or otherwise, additional adjustment to the
compliance timeline for the NHV requirements is needed, the EPA may
address that issue via additional amendments following this action,
including potentially in the separate reconsideration action.
Additionally, the EPA is extending the requirement to conduct
performance tests on ECDs in 40 CFR 60.5413b(b) until January 22, 2027
to provide affected facilities sufficient lead time to retrofit sources
and to plan and execute the performance tests required by the final
rule. The EPA notes that even though the Agency is extending the
deadline to complete the prescribed NHV monitoring on these source
types, the visible emission observation requirements of 40 CFR
60.5417b(d)(8)(v) will continue to apply in order for sources to
demonstrate compliance with the prescribed emission standards as of the
2024 final rule effective date of May 7, 2024, or 180 days after
startup, whichever is later, as required in 40 CFR 60.5370b(a)(9)(ii).
2. Covers and Closed Vent Systems
As in NSPS OOOO and OOOOa, NSPS OOOOb contains requirements for
closed vent systems (CVS) and covers.\25\ CVS route emissions from well
(i.e., oil wells when routing associated gas to a control device),
centrifugal compressor, reciprocating compressor, process controller,
pump, storage vessel and process unit affected facilities to a control
device or to a process. Pursuant to the 2024 final rule, each CVS used
for compliance with an NSPS OOOOb standard must be designed and
operated to capture and route all gases, vapors, and fumes to a process
or to a control device with ``no identifiable emissions'' (NIE) and
these systems must be inspected within 30 days of startup of the
affected facility and annually thereafter to verify NIE. Covers must
form a continuous impermeable barrier over the entire surface area of
the liquid in the storage vessel, over the centrifugal compressor wet
seal fluid degassing system, or over the reciprocating compressor rod
packing emissions collection system. Each cover opening shall be
secured in a closed, sealed position (e.g., covered by a gasketed lid
or cap) whenever material is in the unit on which the cover is
installed, except during those times when it is necessary to use an
opening, such as to inspect equipment or to remove material from the
equipment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Also, as in NSPS OOOOa, CVS and covers that are not
associated with an affected facility are fugitive emissions
components.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the final 2024 rule, initial and continuous compliance of the
NIE requirement can be demonstrated through OGI, EPA Method 21, or
audio, visual and olfactory inspections (AVO) inspections conducted at
the same frequency as the fugitive emissions monitoring for the type of
site where the cover and CVS are located. Alternatively, an owner or
operator could demonstrate ongoing compliance with the NIE requirement
for covers and CVS using the periodic screening or continuous
monitoring requirements for advanced methane detection technologies in
40 CFR 60.5398b. Where AVO inspections are required, the CVS and cover
are determined to operate with NIE if no emissions are detected by AVO
means. Where OGI monitoring is conducted, the CVS and cover are
determined to operate with NIE if no emissions are imaged by the OGI
camera. Where EPA Method 21 monitoring is conducted, the CVS and covers
are determined to operate with NIE if the readings obtained using EPA
Method 21 are less than 500 parts per million by volume (ppmv) above
background. Emissions detected by AVO, OGI, or EPA Method 21 constitute
a deviation of the NIE requirement until a subsequent inspection
determines that the CVS and cover operate with NIE. Where monitoring is
conducted using advanced methane detection technologies, covers and CVS
are determined to operate with NIE if no emissions are detected by the
periodic screening survey or, where continuous monitoring is conducted,
the site remains under the action levels. If emissions are detected
from the site during a periodic screening survey or the site exceeds an
action level, the cover and CVS are still determined to operate with
NIE unless a follow-up inspection with EPA Method 21, OGI, or AVO
indicates that the cover and CVS do not operate with NIE.
Each CVS must be inspected to ensure that the CVS operates with NIE
initially within 30 calendar days after startup of the affected
facility routing emissions through the CVS. Specifically, for the well
sites and centralized production facilities where a CVS is present,
quarterly OGI or EPA Method 21 and bimonthly AVO would be required; for
compressor stations, quarterly OGI or EPA Method 21 and monthly AVO
would be required. For CVS and covers located at onshore natural gas
processing plants, AVO inspections are required annually and instrument
monitoring for NIE must be conducted either bimonthly with OGI
following the procedures in appendix K or quarterly in accordance with
EPA Method 21. For CVS joints, seams, and connections that are
permanently or semi-permanently sealed, owners and operators are not
required to conduct periodic instrument monitoring with OGI or EPA
Method 21, but the owner or operator must still conduct initial
instrument monitoring and periodic AVO monitoring. Additionally, annual
visual inspections must be conducted for all CVS to check for defects,
such as cracks, holes, or gaps. If the CVS is equipped with a bypass,
the bypass must include a flow monitor and sound an alarm to alert
personnel or send a notification via remote alarm to the nearest field
office that a bypass is being diverted to the atmosphere, or it must be
equipped with a car-seal or lock-and-key configuration to ensure the
valve remains in a non-diverting position. To ensure proper design, an
assessment of the CVS must be conducted and certified by a qualified
professional engineer or inhouse engineer.
Any emissions or defects detected during an inspection of a cover
or CVS is subject to repair, with a first attempt at repair within 5
days after detecting the emissions or defect and final repair within 30
days after detecting the emissions or defect. While awaiting final
repair, covers must have a gasket-compatible grease applied to improve
the seal. Delay of repair is allowed where the repair is infeasible
without a shutdown, or it is determined that immediate repair would
result in emissions greater than delaying repair. In all instances,
repairs must be completed by the end of the next shutdown. Owners and
operators may designate parts of the CVS as unsafe to inspect or
difficult to inspect but must have a written plan of the inspection of
this equipment. Equipment that is unsafe to inspect would expose
inspecting personnel to an imminent potential danger; this equipment
must be inspected as frequently as practicable, during safe to inspect
times. Equipment that is difficult to inspect would require elevating
inspecting personnel more than 2 meters above a support surface; this
equipment must be inspected at least once every 5 years.
As to this set of issues, the reconsideration petitioners have
credibly asserted that it is not technically achievable over the long-
term to maintain NIE compliance with these systems.\26\ They state that
fugitive emissions will occur over time due to normal wear and tear
during typical operation of the equipment and leak
[[Page 35973]]
detection and repair (LDAR) programs are typically designed to allow
operators to address them promptly and responsibly.\27\ The petitioners
state that affected facilities will not be able to prevent inevitable
minor fugitive emissions from covers and CVS, and thus the requirement
to achieve and maintain NIE is untenable. According to the petitioners,
this unrealistic requirement will inevitably yield widespread non-
compliance with the NIE requirements in the 2024 final rule due to
normal operation of these affected sources because detected leaks are
treated as deviations without first allowing for repair.\28\ These
concerns related to compliance with a requirement viewed as unworkable
have been reiterated by stakeholders in subsequent meetings with the
EPA.29 30
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0009 at page 7.
\27\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0012 at page 1.
\28\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0013 at page 14.
\29\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0046 at page 16.
\30\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0023 at page 16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this action, the EPA is extending the compliance date for NIE
requirements until January 22, 2027. Based on information received
since promulgation of the 2024 final rule, the EPA has serious concerns
regarding the ability of owners/operators to meet the NIE inspection
requirements in the 2024 rule on the existing compliance schedule and
finds it necessary, appropriate, and in the public interest to extend
the compliance deadline given credible workability concerns. We note
that other compliance requirements for affected facilities that would
otherwise be subject to NIE requirements continue to apply consistent
with the substantive requirements and goals of the 2024 final rule. In
other words, owners and operators still must design and install a CVS
and perform initial and ongoing inspections to ensure that the system
has no leaks consistent with the requirements of the 2024 final rule
and repair any leaks that are found within 30 days. The only
requirements that are being delayed are the inspections to confirm that
systems operate with NIE during which identifying a leak would be
considered a deviation of the standard.
3. Equipment Leaks
In the 2024 final rule, the EPA promulgated requirements for
equipment leaks that included provisions for repairs when equipment
leaks are detected. For each valve where a leak is detected, regulated
entities must comply by repacking the existing valve with a low
emitting (low-E) packing, replacing the existing valve with a low-E
valve; or performing a drill and tap repair with a low-E injectable
packing.\31\ An owner or operator is not required to utilize a low-E
valve or low-E packing to replace or repack a valve if the owner or
operator demonstrates that a low-E valve or low-E packing is not
technically feasible. Low-E valve or low-E packing that is not suitable
for its intended use is considered to be technically infeasible.
Factors that may be considered in determining technical infeasibility
include the following: retrofit requirements for installation (e.g.,
re-piping or space limitation), commercial unavailability for valve
type, or certain instrumentation assemblies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ The 2024 final rule includes the following definitions:
Low-e valve means a valve (including its specific packing assembly)
for which the manufacturer has issued a written warranty or
performance guarantee that it will not emit fugitives at greater
than 100 ppm in the first five years. A valve may qualify as a low-e
valve if it is as an extension of another valve that has qualified
as a low-e valve. Low-e packing means a valve packing product for
which the manufacturer has issued a written warranty or performance
guarantee that it will not emit fugitives at greater than 100 ppm in
the first five years. Low-e injectable packing is a type of low-e
packing product for which the manufacturer has also issued a written
warranty or performance guarantee and that can be injected into a
valve during a ``drill-and-tap'' repair of the valve.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reconsideration petitioners have credibly asserted that requiring
replacement of leaking valves with low-E valves without first providing
an opportunity for an attempt at repair of the existing valve is
technically and economically infeasible, did not follow proper notice
and comment requirements, and creates confusion regarding when
replacement is considered feasible in an enforcement proceeding.\32\
Based on cost estimates provided in the petitions for reconsideration,
petitioners claim that such equipment (low-E valves and packing) is not
commercially available at costs that make widespread replacement of
valves with low-E equipment viable across the industry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0013 at pages 7-11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA acknowledges that regulatory language in the 2024 final
rule introduced unintended compliance difficulties related to equipment
leak repair requirements. As currently written, the regulatory language
in 40 CFR 60.5400b(h)(2)(ii)(A) appears to require a source to repack
an existing valve with low-E packing, and then the language is unclear
as to whether a source must also comply with paragraph (B) or (C),
which require that they either replace the valve with a low-e valve or
perform a drill and tap repair with a low-E injectable packing,
respectively. It was not the EPA's intention to require that a source
repack an existing valve and replace that valve during the same repair.
Furthermore, the CFR erroneously includes two versions of paragraph
60.5401b(i). The EPA discovered since promulgation of the 2024 final
rule that these two copies of the repair requirements paragraph differ
and create confusion for affected facilities. The first of the two
copies included in the CFR is correct while the second contains similar
errors to those present in 40 CFR 60.5400b(h)(2)(ii). In order to
alleviate the compliance confusion created by the conflicting
regulatory language, and to provide potentially affected sources
additional time to undertake planning to obtain needed low-e equipment
given the cost and widespread need for such equipment, the EPA is
extending the compliance date for equipment leak repair requirements
contained in 40 CFR 60.5400b(h)(2)(ii) and 60.5401b(i)(2)(ii) until
January 22, 2027 or 180 days after startup of the affected source,
whichever is later.
4. Process Controllers
Process controllers are automated instruments used for maintaining
a process condition, such as liquid level, pressure, pressure
difference, or temperature. Historically, in the oil and gas industry,
many process controllers were powered by pressurized natural gas and
therefore would emit natural gas to the atmosphere. However, process
controllers may also be powered by electricity or compressed air, and
these types of controllers do not use or emit natural gas. In the
December 2022 Supplemental Proposal, the EPA proposed a ``zero
emissions'' VOC and methane standard for most process controllers in
NSPS OOOOb and a ``zero emissions'' methane presumptive standard for
most process controllers in EG OOOOc. This standard can be achieved by
using a process controller that is not powered by natural gas, by
capturing the emissions from the natural gas-driven controllers and
routing them to a process, or by using self-contained controllers. The
2024 final rule includes the ``zero emissions'' VOC standard proposed
in December 2022 along with different standards for process controllers
in Alaska at locations where access to electrical power from the power
grid is not available. The requirements for these sources in Alaska are
to use lower emitting natural gas-driven process controllers and to
perform inspections to ensure that they are operating properly.
[[Page 35974]]
The process controller standards apply to the collection of new,
modified, and reconstructed natural gas-driven process controllers at a
site (i.e., a well site, centralized production facility, onshore
natural gas processing plant, or compressor station). Process
controllers that are emergency shutdown devices (ESD) or that are not
natural gas-driven are not included in the affected facility
definition.
The standards that apply differ depending on the location of the
site and whether access to electrical power is available at the site,
which are sites that have commercial line power onsite. For any site
outside of Alaska, the standard for all process controllers is zero
emissions of VOC and methane. Zero emissions of VOC and methane may be
achieved by using process controllers that are not driven by natural
gas (and thus not affected facilities), by routing natural gas-driven
process controller vapors through a CVS to a process, by using self-
contained natural gas-driven process controllers, or by another means
that achieves the numerical standard of zero emissions of methane and
VOC. For sites in Alaska with access to electrical power the standard
for all process controllers at the site is also zero emissions of VOC
and methane. For sites in Alaska without access to electrical power,
owners/operators must use natural gas-driven process controllers with
low natural gas emission rates. These process controllers include
continuous bleed controllers with an emissions rate (or bleed rate) of
less than or equal to 6 standard cubic feet per hour (scfh) and
intermittent vent controllers, which are process controllers that only
emit natural gas when they actuate, rather than emitting continuously.
Intermittent vent controllers are subject to monitoring requirements.
Further, as an alternative, sites in Alaska without access to
electrical power may route emissions from natural gas-driven process
controllers to a control device achieving a 95 percent emissions
reduction. Table 12 of the March 2024 final rule preamble (89 FR 16882)
summarizes the emissions standards for process controllers.
Based on comments the EPA received in 2022 and 2023 expressing
concerns about new sources' ability to obtain the equipment necessary
to demonstrate compliance with the final standard of zero emissions
immediately upon the effective date of the final rule, the EPA
finalized a NSPS compliance deadline for process controllers that
allows up to 1 year from the effective date of the final rule to come
into full compliance with the final standard of zero emissions. Until
that final date of compliance, owners and operators must demonstrate
compliance with an interim standard which mirrors the requirements for
sites in Alaska that do not have access to electrical power. See 89 FR
16929-30.
According to reconsideration petitioners, in the 2024 final rule,
existing sites that trigger the OOOOb modification provisions, and thus
become subject to the NSPS, have to convert all process controllers in
a process controller affected facility to comply with the zero-emission
standard by May 7, 2025, or upon modification, whichever is later.
Reconsideration petitioners have credibly asserted that this will place
a significant demand on the equipment, supplies, and service vendors
during the compliance time frame and add more strain to a supply chain
that currently requires 12-18 months to deliver certain types of
components necessary for the conversion of large natural gas driven
controllers to an air driven system.\33\ According to petitioners, if
an operator is unable to complete the conversion due to reasons beyond
its control, the operator will have to make a decision whether to
continue operating, potentially in a non-compliant state; or shut down
that compressor station, thereby reducing its ability to move gas
during peak demand periods, pursuant to their Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission approved tariffs.\34\ Petitioners also state that the EPA's
regulatory language is ambiguous and creates confusion regarding the
types of processes potentially subject to the standards. Specifically,
petitioners have credibly asserted that the 2024 final rule is unclear
with respect to whether certain high-pressure applications are included
in the scope of the regulations.\35\ Therefore, even more sources may
require the equipment necessary to achieve the zero emissions standard
which puts even more demand on a limited supply, resulting in further
compliance delays that EPA did not intend to create in promulgating the
2024 final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0014 at page 10.
\34\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0014 at page 10.
\35\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0043 attachment 2 at page 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this final action, the EPA is extending the second phase of the
phased-in compliance deadline for the zero emission standards
applicable to process controllers to January 22, 2027 to address the
supply chain and logistical issues raised by petitioners. The EPA has
determined that the additional compliance time is needed to ensure that
sufficient equipment can be sourced, obtained, and installed in
timelines that are achievable by affected sources. In the meantime,
consistent with the substantive provisions and goals of the 2024 final
rule, the interim standard continues to apply to process controller
affected facilities (i.e., the same standard applicable to sites in
Alaska without access to electricity).
5. Storage Vessels
In the 2024 final rule, the EPA promulgated requirements that
defined a storage vessel affected facility as a tank battery that has
the potential for VOC emissions equal to or greater than 6 tons per
year (tpy) or methane emissions equal to or greater than 20 tpy. A
storage vessel is a tank or other vessel that contains an accumulation
of crude oil, condensate, intermediate hydrocarbon liquids, or produced
water, and that is constructed primarily of non-earthen materials. A
tank battery is a group of all storage vessels that are manifolded
together for liquid transfer. For purposes of this rule, a tank battery
may consist of a single storage vessel if only one storage vessel is
present. The 2024 final rule includes language in 40 CFR
60.5365b(e)(ii) that describes how a source should determine the
potential emissions from storage vessels. Specifically, the final rule
states that potential for VOC and methane emissions must be calculated
using a generally accepted model or calculation methodology that
accounts for flashing, working, and breathing losses, based on the
maximum average daily throughput to the tank battery determined for a
30-day period of production.
Storage vessel affected facilities must reduce emissions of VOC and
methane by 95 percent. The standard reflects the degree of emission
limitation achievable through application of a combustion control
device or vapor recovery unit (VRU). For storage vessel affected
facilities not at a well site or centralized production site, and
without potential for flashing emissions, owners and operators may
choose to comply by using an internal or external floating roof to
reduce emissions in accordance with 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb (NSPS
for Volatile Organic Liquid Storage Vessels). The rule allows removal
of a control device from a storage vessel affected facility if the
owner or operator maintains the uncontrolled actual VOC emissions at
less than 4 tpy and the actual methane emissions at less than 14 tpy as
determined monthly for 12 consecutive months.
Storage vessel affected facilities which use a control device to
reduce emissions must equip each storage
[[Page 35975]]
vessel in the tank battery with a cover and must equip the tank battery
with one or more CVS which route all emissions to a process or one or
more control devices. Owners and operators of flares and other control
devices must conduct monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting to ensure
that the control device is continuously achieving the required 95
percent reduction. More information on the flare and other control
device monitoring and compliance provisions is provided in section X.H
of the March 2024 final rule preamble (89 FR 16963) and information
regarding covers and CVS may be found in section X.K of the March 2024
final rule preamble (89 FR 16984).
The EPA finalized an affected facility-specific definition of
``modification'' for storage vessels to include specific physical
changes that trigger the modification requirements. Those changes
include adding an additional storage vessel, replacing existing storage
vessel(s) that result in an increased capacity of the tank battery,
receiving additional throughput from production well(s) at tank
batteries at well sites or centralized production facilities, or
receiving additional fluids which cumulatively exceed the throughput
used in the most recent determination of the potential for VOC or
methane emissions not located at a well site or centralized production
facility, including each tank battery at compressors stations or
onshore natural gas processing plants that also result in exceeding the
applicability threshold for either VOC or methane. The EPA defined
``reconstruction'' for OOOOb storage vessels to mean at least half of
the storage vessels are replaced in the existing tank battery that
consists of more than one storage vessel, or the provisions of 40 CFR
60.15 are met for the existing tank battery and the resulting emissions
exceed the applicability threshold for either VOC or methane.
Further, in the 2024 final rule, the EPA finalized criteria that
must be met for a permit limit or other requirement to qualify as a
legally and practicably enforceable (LPE) limit for purposes of
determining whether a tank battery is an affected or designated
facility under NSPS OOOOb or EG OOOOc, respectively. The 2024 final
rule established that a LPE limit must include a quantitative
production limit and quantitative operational limit(s) for the
equipment, or quantitative operational limits for the equipment; an
averaging time period for the production limit, if a production-based
limit is used, that is equal to or less than 30 days; established
parametric limits for the production and/or operational limit(s), and
where a control device is used to achieve an operational limit, an
initial compliance demonstration (i.e., performance test) for the
control device that establishes the parametric limits; ongoing
monitoring of the parametric limits that demonstrates continuous
compliance with the production and/or operational limit(s);
recordkeeping by the owner or operator that demonstrates continuous
compliance with the limit(s) in; and periodic reporting that
demonstrates continuous compliance.
Reconsideration petitioners have raised concerns with provisions
related to how sources determine potential emissions,\36\ the triggers
for modification, and the specific criteria for limits on potential to
emit to be considered LPE.\37\ Some reconsideration petitioners
credibly asserted that the applicability determination language in 40
CFR 60.5365b(e)(2)(ii) is ambiguous for tanks that commenced
construction, modification, or reconstruction after the date of the
supplemental proposal (December 6, 2022) and prior to the OOOOb
effective date (``pre-effective date tanks''), May 7, 2024.\38\ The
petitioners also stated that it is unclear what ``30-day period of
production'' operators must use to determine the maximum average daily
throughput to calculate the potential for VOC and methane emissions for
pre-effective date tanks.\39\ Without clarification, operators may not
know with certainty the scope of affected storage vessels that must
comply with OOOOb by the compliance deadline. The petitioners also
credibly asserted that requiring a determination earlier than the OOOOb
effective date imposes compliance obligations before they are
effective. Additionally, the petitioners stated this is compounded by
defining a ``legally and practicably enforceable limit,'' which
effectively eliminated the ability to rely on permit limits for
applicability determinations under OOOOb. Stakeholders have continued
to reiterate these concerns in further discussions with the EPA.\40\
Petitioners further stated that the LPE requirements apply to storage
vessels for which states do not have the authority or mechanisms to
apply such limits in permits.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0043 at page 17.
\37\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0016 at pages 2-4.
\38\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0009 at page 7.
\39\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0010 at page 5.
\40\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0046 at page 15.
\41\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0043 attachment 2 at page 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to petitioners, the expansive storage vessel modification
provisions will immediately and automatically trigger new source
requirements for tens of thousands of tanks and tank batteries (far
more than the EPA predicted when formulating those provisions). The EPA
agrees that the modification provisions finalized in 2024 contain a
degree of vagueness such that it is possible that far more midstream
storage vessels could trigger modification than the EPA estimated in
the 2024 final rule. We did not anticipate that these provisions would
affect the large number of sources cited by petitioners and agree that
additional compliance time is needed for the large number of
potentially affected sources.
The petitioners also stated the EPA should allow more time than
afforded in the 2024 final rule to allow state, local, and tribal
agencies to adopt and implement conformant LPE limits. The EPA is
extending the date for the specific provisions required for a limit to
be considered LPE limits in 40 CFR 60.5365b(e)(2)(i)(A)-(F) until
January 22, 2027. This action will ensure there is enough time for
sources to work with delegated authorities to establish limits that are
LPE without foreclosing the use of LPE limits already established that
may or may not contain the same level of specificity as the
requirements in NSPS OOOOb during that time. Additionally, the EPA is
extending the date at which the throughput-based modification triggers
become effective by 18 months in order to provide time for the
potentially large number of sources that would trigger those provisions
to make any needed adjustments to facility planning, equipment
procurement, and process changes needed to comply with the
requirements. Finally, the EPA is extending the date by which sources
must calculate potential emissions using the 30-day period of
production by 18 months to allow facilities to obtain additional
information and make the requisite decisions related to their
facilities that may be subject to these requirements. We note that
until the provisions that we are extending come into effect, there are
still provisions in place that establish what other activities
constitute a modification, i.e., sources that add an additional vessel
or replace a vessel with one that has increased capacity still trigger
modification. Sources are still required to determine the potential
emissions from storage vessels. The only change to these provisions is
that, in the interim period, sources need not use the (confusing) 30-
day period of production calculation
[[Page 35976]]
and limits on potential emissions can be considered LPE with or without
the specific criteria included in the 2024 final rule. Any sources that
do trigger modification provisions will still be subject to the
standards in the 2024 final rule and this action does not change those
standards.
6. Super Emitter Program
The EPA included the Super Emitter Program (SEP) in the 2024 final
rule, previously proposed as the Super Emitter Response Program in the
December 2022 Supplemental Proposal. For purposes of the 2024 final
rule, a ``super emitter event'' is defined as any emissions event that
is located at or near an oil and natural gas facility and that is
detected using remote detection methods and has a quantified emission
rate of 100 kg/hr of methane or greater.
As described in the preamble to the 2024 final rule, this program
was designed to provide a mechanism by which the EPA would provide
owners and operators with timely notifications of super-emitter
emissions data collected by EPA-certified third parties using EPA-
approved remote sensing technologies. See 89 FR 16877. Where such an
event is attributable to an oil or natural gas source regulated under
CAA section 111 (NSPS OOOO, OOOOa, or OOOOb, or a state or Federal plan
implementing EG OOOOc), the responsible owner or operator would take
action in response to such notifications in accordance with the
applicable regulation. Id. Section X.C of the 2024 final rule preamble
describes the SEP in detail. See 89 FR 16876.
In implementing this novel program, the EPA has experienced
unanticipated difficulties and concerns that require additional time
for effective and lawful administration of various program
procedures.\42\ For example, while the rule requires a third-party
notifier to provide a significant amount of information regarding a
super emitter event as part of submitting a notification of the event
to the EPA, the attribution of who owns or operates a site is not a
required element. While the EPA has developed tools to aid certified
third parties in the attribution of identified events, in limited
practice, the certified third parties that have submitted information
to date have chosen not to include an owner/operator attribution in the
submitted notification. In the absence of this information, to meet the
program's goals of providing the submitted information about these
events to the owners or operators of the appropriate facilities, the
EPA must itself determine and then confirm the owner/operator
attribution. This process has proven time- and labor-intensive and
generated unanticipated concerns about improper attribution and related
consequences for enforcement and compliance efforts more generally.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0010 at 27-32.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Though the super-emitter program has thus far received relatively
few submittals of notifications of super-emitter events from a
certified third party, we expect that the number of submittals would
grow extensively if more cost-effective technologies were approved
(e.g., satellite sensors). With the potential increase in the number of
submitted notifications, the EPA's ability to provide timely
notification of these events to the facility owner or operator would be
hampered given the existing challenges identified in determination
attribution for each owner or operator. Similarly, if the number of
notifications that the EPA receives based on the currently approved
remote-sensing technology were to substantially increase, the EPA's
ability to timely provide the notification to the appropriate owner and
operator would be constrained by the EPA's ability to make and confirm
the owner or operator attribution. These limitations would lead to
delays in providing notifications to the appropriate owner or operator
that are inconsistent with the program's design and intended function.
A central element of the program's design is to provide information
about these emissions events in a timely fashion to the appropriate
owners and operators, so that they can quickly conduct the
investigations into the event required under the rule and take any
necessary corrective action if the source is subject to the rule.
Delays in providing the notifications to owners and operators would
result in the information being stale when received, or superseded by
intervening events, limiting both the value of information that could
be discovered through the required investigation and the opportunity to
take corrective action.
Additionally, implementation of the program to date indicates that
application of this program has been broader than the EPA anticipated
in promulgating the 2024 final rule. For instance, part of the
definition of a super-emitter event under 40 CFR 60.5371b is that the
event be located at or near an oil and natural gas facility. In limited
practice, this definition has resulted in the EPA receiving
notifications of an event at a downstream production site not subject
to any upstream oil and gas regulation. Specifically, a notification
was provided to a renewable fuel refinery in Bakersfield, California on
January 21, 2025. Though this facility is within an oil and gas
production basin and an emission was detected from the site, it does
not appear to be the type of oil and gas facility that the EPA intended
to cover in the SEP. This distinction is important since these types of
emissions are likely tied to short-term process conditions which are
typical at downstream production sites. While the program requires the
EPA to review the submitted notifications of super-emitter events for
completeness and accuracy, it does not allow the EPA the discretion to
not post or provide a notification to an owner or operator identified
in the notification for other reasons, such as the EPA's judgment on
the appropriateness of a notification. In the absence of such
discretion, the EPA is required to provide a notification to an owner
or operator of who is identified in the notification, so long as the
EPA had reviewed the notification and determined that it is complete
and does not contain information that the EPA finds to be inaccurate to
a reasonable degree of certainty, even if other reasons might counsel
against providing the notification, such as when that site has already
received a notification of a particular emissions event, or if the EPA
has determined that a notification relates to an emissions event that
is not regulated or prohibited under the EPA's oil and gas rules.
For these reasons, the EPA is extending the date for future
implementation of the super-emitter program until January 22, 2027.
This extension also impacts the timing for EPA action on methane
detection technology under 40 CFR 60.5398b(d)(1)(iii) for use in the
SEP. Because the EPA is extending the date for future implementation of
the SEP, there is no need for the EPA to act on submissions of remote-
detection technology for use in the program in the intervening period.
Therefore, the EPA is extending the provisions that include conditional
approval of methane detection technology for use in the SEP that occurs
if the EPA does not act on submissions of those technologies by the
timelines prescribed by the rule until January 22, 2027.
7. Flare Pilot Flame and Alarm Requirements
In the 2024 final rule, the EPA finalized requirements that all
enclosed combustion devices, other than boilers and process heaters,
that introduce the vent stream with the primary fuel into the flame
zone or use the vent stream as the primary fuel, as well as all
catalytic
[[Page 35977]]
incinerators, that operate above a minimum flow rate established by the
manufacturer must install and operate a continuous burning pilot or
combustion flame. Additionally, the combustion devices must have a way
to alert the nearest control room whenever the pilot or combustion
flame is unlit.
The 2024 final rule also requires that all flares (e.g.,
unassisted, pressure-assisted, and steam-assisted) have a continuous
burning pilot or combustion flame and have a system that provides an
alert to the nearest control room whenever the pilot or combustion
flame is unlit. Additionally, the flow rate to a flare must be
maintained at a level that ensures compliance with the flare tip
velocity limits in the 40 CFR part 60 General Provisions, and the flow
rate to an enclosed combustion device must be below a maximum flow rate
established during the performance test or by the manufacturer, if the
initial performance test is performed by the manufacturer.
Flares and enclosed combustion devices that use pressure-assisted
tips to promote mixing at the burner tip are not subject to this
maximum flow rate limit because these units are designed to operate at
high flow rates. All flares and all enclosed combustion devices used to
comply with the standards must also operate with a continuous burning
pilot flame and with no visible emissions, except for periods not to
exceed a total of 1 minute during any 15-minute period. Compliance with
the visible emissions requirement can be confirmed either through
monthly testing using EPA Method 22 or through continuous use of a
video surveillance camera. The 2024 final rule requires that if owners
and operators use certain flares and enclosed combustion devices to
comply with the standards, they must install a system to send an alarm
to the nearest control room if an unlit pilot flame is detected on a
flare or enclosed combustion device. Additionally, during each fugitive
emissions inspection conducted using an OGI camera, including those
conducted in response to periodic screening events using alternative
technologies, owners and operators must observe each enclosed
combustion device and flare to determine if it is operating properly,
including ensuring that a flame is present and that there is no
indication of uncontrolled emissions. During each fugitive emissions
inspection conducted using AVO, owners and operators must observe each
enclosed combustion device and flare to determine if it is operating
properly, visually confirming that the pilot flame is lit and operating
properly.
Owners and operators also have the option to request an alternative
test method to demonstrate continuous 95.0 percent control of
emissions. Using this option, the owner or operator would demonstrate
that the combustion device continuously achieves 95.0 percent
combustion efficiency or that the combustion device continuously
complies with the combustion zone NHV and NHV dilution parameter
requirements. The alternative test method, if approved by the EPA,
would be used in lieu of the other monitoring required for combustion
device (e.g., vent gas NHV, flow rate).
In addition to information that must be reported, owners and
operators must keep records of continuous compliance with the
monitoring requirements, including information about the pilot flame
being lit, CPMS limits, CPMS hourly and average values, and results of
visible emissions observations or surveillance camera feed.
Petitioners have raised concerns that the 2024 final rule
requirements for continuous pilot flames pose significant logistical
challenges. These challenges relate to providing supplemental fuel to
maintain a continuous pilot flame at intermittently operating processes
for affected facilities that are located far from reliable sources of
such fuel.\43\ Petitioners have also described challenges in obtaining
and installing communications equipment capable of reliably
transmitting an alarm to the nearest control room.\44\ Due to the large
number and remote geographic location of many flares and enclosed
combustion devices used to achieve compliance with the EPA's standards,
industry requires additional time to prepare and install needed
equipment to maintain continuous pilot flames that alarm in the nearest
control room when the pilot is unlit. Therefore, in this action, we are
extending the date by which owners and operators who utilize these
flares and enclosed combustion devices must: (1) ensure that flares and
enclosed combustion devices operate with a continuous pilot flame, and
(2) install and operate a system to send an alarm to the nearest
control room when a pilot flame is unlit to 18 months from publication
of this interim final rule. The emission reduction requirements for
flares and enclosed combustion devices and the other monitoring of such
devices described above are not affected by this extension. Put another
way, during this extension owners and operators are still required to
ensure that emissions being routed to a flare or enclosed combustion
devise are reduced by 95.0 percent, and there are still other
applicable requirements in the 2024 final rule to ensure compliance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0010 at page 13.
\44\ See EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0358-0010 at page 13-14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Deadline Extensions for EG OOOOc
1. State Plan Submittal Deadline
In the 2024 final rule, the EPA finalized a state plan submittal
deadline of 24 months after publication of the final EG OOOOc (March 9,
2026).\45\ While the EPA did not receive any petitions for
reconsideration on this deadline, since the rule was finalized, the EPA
has regularly engaged with various states regarding their concerns. For
example, one state has informally asked their respective EPA Region for
an extension of the state plan submittal deadline; other states have
been inquiring as to the consequences of late state plan submissions.
These compliance assistance efforts from the EPA to the states prompted
the EPA to assess the status of the state plan submittals. This
assessment has led the EPA to determine that states planning to submit
state plans need additional time to develop their plans to achieve the
emissions-reduction goals of the 2024 final rule in an effective and
efficient manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ See 89 FR 17010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA expects approximately 21 states to submit state plans.
Since publication of the 2024 final rule, states should now be
approximately halfway completed with the plan development process
because state plans are due on March 9, 2026; in other words, we are
over 1 year into the 2-year time allowance. For those states relying
entirely or mostly on the EPA's model rule included in the final EG
without modification, the EPA would expect states to have completed, or
be near completing, at least some of the following development
milestones: (1) Conduct and document meaningful engagement with
pertinent stakeholders pursuant to 40 CFR 60.5363c(a)(6) and 60.23a(i);
(2) identify the types of designated facilities within the state that
will be covered by the state plan; (3) produce a draft of major
portions of the state plan, including standards of performance,
compliance schedules, increments of progress, and compliance assurance
measures, incorporating relevant sections of the model rule in EG
OOOOc; (4) determine and/or draft enforceable regulatory mechanisms to
implement the state plan (e.g., general permits, state regulations,
etc.); and (5)
[[Page 35978]]
notice the draft state plan for public comment in accordance with state
laws.
Further, for those states not relying predominantly on the model
rule but which are instead leveraging pre-existing state programs and/
or invoking remaining useful life and other factors (RULOF) to apply
less stringent standards than the presumptive standards in EG OOOOc,
the EPA would expect states to have completed, or be near completing,
at least some of the following milestones: (1) Conduct and document
meaningful engagement with pertinent stakeholders; (2) identify the
types of designated facilities within the state that will be covered by
the state plan; (3) compile and compare all relevant pre-existing state
regulations (or statutes, permits, or other legal authorities) to
corresponding coverage of EG OOOOc and determine which state
regulations to leverage for purposes of satisfying state plan
obligations; (4) determine changes necessary, if any, to harmonize pre-
existing state regulations with state plan requirements of EG OOOOc
(e.g., changes to designated facilities, designated pollutants, types
of standards, etc.); (5) conduct and document analyses to demonstrate
equivalency between pre-existing state regulations and EG OOOOc in
terms of emissions reductions; (6) begin state rulemaking process to
make changes to existing state regulations, if any are necessary; (7)
collect and document information to support RULOF demonstrations, if
any, for less stringent standards (or longer compliance schedules) than
those in EG OOOOc; (8) determine alternative standards to apply in any
case where invoking RULOF; and (9) draft other portions of the state
plan (those not leveraging pre-existing state regulations and/or
invoking RULOF).
The EPA, however, has identified twelve states that have yet to
identify how they plan to implement EG OOOOc. Several of these states
are still seeking to identify all the potentially impacted facilities
within their borders before deciding whether to develop a state plan.
The EPA has also identified that 18 of 21 states intending to submit a
state plan have yet to share significant portions of those plans with
the EPA for feedback. The EPA expects approximately nine states to
leverage at least some pre-existing state regulations to satisfy state
plan obligations. While at least four states have identified some
revisions necessary to harmonize their pre-existing programs with EG
OOOOc, the EPA is aware of no state that has begun its rulemaking
process to undertake those revisions. Additionally, while the EPA has
received numerous questions from states concerning demonstrating
equivalency between pre-existing state regulations and EG OOOOc in
terms emissions reductions, the EPA has not received any draft analyses
for such demonstrations for review. Similarly, while the EPA currently
expects approximately five states to invoke RULOF to apply less
stringent standards to certain designated facilities, and while the EPA
has received numerous questions from states concerning RULOF
demonstrations, the EPA has yet to receive any draft RULOF
demonstrations for review. The EPA outlines this information in table 2
below. This demonstrates that many states are struggling to develop
their plans on the schedule that the 2024 final rule requires.
Table 2--Status of State and Territory Plans
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. EPA-Approved State Plans....... None.
II. Anticipated Negative Hawaii, American Samoa, Guam.
Declarations to be Submitted to
the EPA.
III. Negative Declaration Vermont (submitted), Puerto Rico
Submitted/EPA Approved. (submitted), District of Columbia
(submitted).
IV. Anticipated State Plans to be Maine, New York, Delaware, Maryland,
Submitted to the EPA. Pennsylvania, Virginia, West
Virginia, Georgia, South Carolina,
Tennessee, Arkansas, New Mexico,
Oklahoma, Texas, Colorado, Montana,
North Dakota, Utah, Wyoming,
Arizona, California.
V. Anticipated State Plans New York, Maryland, New Mexico,
Leveraging Pre-Existing State Colorado, Montana, North Dakota,
Programs to be Submitted to the Utah, Wyoming, California.
EPA.
VI. Anticipated State Plans Tennessee, Arkansas, Oklahoma,
Invoking RULOF to be Submitted to Texas, California.
the EPA.
VII. Final State Plans Submitted None.
to the EPA.
VIII. Draft State Plans Submitted Pennsylvania (partial), West
to the EPA. Virginia (partial), Montana
(partial).
IX. EPA Has Not Received a Draft Maine, New York, Delaware, Maryland,
or Final State Plan or Negative Virginia, Alabama, Florida,
Declaration. Kentucky, Mississippi, North
Carolina, Georgia, South Carolina,
Tennessee, Illinois, Indiana,
Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio,
Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico,
Oklahoma, Texas, Missouri,
Colorado, Montana, North Dakota,
Utah, Wyoming, Arizona, California,
Hawaii, American Samoa, Guam.
X. Anticipated Federal Plan Connecticut, Massachusetts, New
Promulgation. Hampshire, Rhode Island, New
Jersey, Wisconsin, Iowa, Kansas,
Nebraska, South Dakota, Nevada,
Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA acknowledges this delay in meeting expected informal state
plan development milestones could be because of various factors,
including several that the EPA acknowledged in the 2024 final rule.
However, the EPA has determined that the practical reality of states
identifying impacted sources and pertinent stakeholders, conducting
meaningful engagement, comparing pre-existing state programs to EG
OOOOc, and producing RULOF demonstrations has proven to be more time-
consuming than we expected because of various challenges faced by
states. These challenges stem from both the relatively large and
complex nature of the source category, the corresponding complexity
associated with applying EG OOOOc to designated facilities, and states'
lack of familiarity with the newly revised general implementing
regulations.\46\
[[Page 35979]]
States are understandably taking more time than the EPA initially
expected as they navigate these multiple challenges, including through
iterative questions for and discussions with the Agency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ EG OOOOc represents the first time states will be
implementing the requirements promulgated in the revisions to 40 CFR
part 60, subpart Ba (subpart Ba), the implementing regulations for
the adoption and submission of state plans. 88 FR 80480.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moreover, implementing some of these requirements in the context of
EG OOOOc in particular is proving to be more complex than originally
anticipated. For example, the new requirement to submit documentation
of meaningful engagement pursuant to 40 CFR 60.23a(i) has proven time
consuming due to the large number of geographically dispersed
designated facilities in some states, covering multiple industry
segments. States have faced challenges determining the appropriate
scope, form, and number of engagement activities, as well as
identifying pertinent stakeholders and owners and operators. States
have also communicated to the EPA that the relatively complicated
technical nature of EG OOOOc has presented obstacles to fostering
public participation at engagement activities.
Similarly, states are needing more time than anticipated to invoke
RULOF to apply less stringent standards (or longer compliance
schedules).\47\ For example, due to the large number of EG OOOOc
designated facilities, some states have undertaken the task of
attempting to segment designated facility types into classes for
purposes of RULOF. Given the number and diverse circumstances of
designated facilities in the source category, collecting enough
information on facility operations necessary to determine appropriate
classes and associated standards has proven difficult and time-
consuming. For similar reasons, states have confronted difficulties
with quickly collecting the full complement of relevant data on
emissions and costs to demonstrate fundamental differences between the
information specific to those facilities (for which the states are
invoking RULOF) and the information the EPA considered in determining
the presumptive standards in EG OOOOc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ See 40 CFR 60.24a(e)-(h); 88 FR 80508-80528.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the EPA provided flexibility to states with pre-existing
regulatory programs for the oil and natural gas industry to leverage
those programs for the purposes of state plan submission, the scope and
stringency of those programs varies considerably, each posing unique
issues regarding demonstrating equivalency or harmonizing with EG
OOOOc. Analyses to compare the stringency of pre-existing standards and
their associated compliance assurance measures to EG OOOOc have proven
to be complicated and time-consuming, especially for those presumptive
standards that are expressed in a non-numerical format in EG OOOOc.
Administrative complexities have also arisen for several states
attempting to concurrently revise associated state rules for Reasonably
Available Control Technology in their State Implementation Plans (SIP)
for CAA sections 182 and/or 184, in order to maintain a single set of
requirements for the oil and natural gas sources in those states.
These challenges have increased the time needed to develop state
plans beyond the EPA's expectations. The EPA has worked to provide
assistance to states along the way. The EPA has made information
publicly available in efforts to helps states including a document
summarizing requirements for state plans \48\ and answers to frequently
asked questions about the 2024 final rule.\49\ Additionally, the EPA
notes that states have returned multiple times to their Regional
offices and the EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards for
numerous meetings to get dozens of complex implementation questions
answered, many of which require the coordinated weeks-long effort of
multiple EPA staff members to respond to.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-08/ooooc-summary-of-requirements-for-state-plans-final-8-23-2024.pdf.
\49\ https://www.epa.gov/controlling-air-pollution-oil-and-natural-gas-operations/frequently-asked-questions-about-epas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on the information the EPA currently has, the EPA anticipates
the vast majority of states intending to submit state plans will be
unable to meet the current state plan submittal deadline of March 9,
2026. If a state does not submit a state plan within the prescribed
time, the EPA is obligated to promulgate a Federal plan within twelve
months of the submittal deadline.\50\ The EPA does not find it
appropriate to maintain a state plan submittal deadline that we now
have reason to believe is untenable for most states intending to submit
state plans. The EPA does not wish to set these states up to fail,
especially when they have been diligently working to try to meet the
submittal deadline. Extending the submittal deadline will enable states
to devote suitable time and resources to developing approvable plans
that meet all applicable requirements and achieve the objectives of the
states and their stakeholders. In contrast, pressing forward on the
existing deadline could needlessly embroil states and the EPA in
disputes over untimely or insufficient submissions, thereby triggering
administrative processes and litigation that detract from
implementation of the emission guidelines and could be avoided with a
targeted extension.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ 40 CFR 60.27a(c). The EPA's obligation to promulgate a
Federal plan is removed if the state submits, and the EPA approves,
a state plan before the EPA issues a Federal plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In this action we are extending the deadline for state plan
submittal until January 22, 2027 for the reasons discussed in this
section. This gives states additional time from their current deadline
in March 2026.
III. Rulemaking Procedures
As noted in section I.C. of this preamble, the EPA's authority for
the rulemaking procedures followed in this action is provided by APA
section 553(b)(B), which allows an agency to forgo notice-and comment
requirements ``when the Agency for good cause finds (and incorporates
the finding and a brief statement of reasons, therefore, in the rule
issued) that notice and public procedure thereon are impracticable,
unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.'' \51\ The EPA finds
good cause to forego prior notice and comment because that rulemaking
procedure is impracticable and unnecessary under the circumstances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ Although the procedural requirements of CAA section 307(d)
apply to the EPA's promulgation or revision of any standard of
performance under CAA section 111, these procedural requirements do
not apply ``in the case of any rule or circumstance referred to in
subparagraphs (A) or (B) of [APA section 553(b)].'' 42 U.S.C.
7607(d)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA finds that prior notice and comment is unnecessary because
the EPA is making only targeted changes to certain compliance or
implementation dates in response to immediate concerns raised by
stakeholders, including owners and operators subject to the rule's
requirements. For the reasons described in more detail in section II of
this preamble, certain regulatory provisions have created unintended
compliance difficulties unrelated to the actual emissions standards and
other requirements of the underlying regulations. This targeted action
provides subject facilities the additional time needed to resolve these
specific compliance and implementation problems without disrupting the
sequencing of the compliance deadlines in the final rule or risking
interim noncompliance proceedings. The EPA believes the targeted
deadline revisions in this action do not interfere with, or
unreasonably frustrate, the ultimate emission reduction requirements of
the rule. To the extent interested parties
[[Page 35980]]
raise concerns about this action or any particular deadline amendment
made therein, the EPA will carefully review any comments submitted on
this action and consider whether changes are appropriate after close of
the comment period.
In addition, the EPA finds that prior notice and comment would be
impracticable given the applicable compliance deadlines and the
timeline involved in completing such procedures. The EPA has determined
through ongoing communications with stakeholders and review of the
relevant regulatory language that there are legitimate barriers to
compliance and/or questions as to whether the regulatory provisions for
which we are extending compliance deadlines are practically and
logistically achievable as promulgated in the timeframes allowed by the
2024 final rule. As a result, the EPA is making only targeted changes
to certain compliance dates in this action to provide the immediate
relief necessary to avoid unnecessary and problematic situations of
owners and operators expending time and resources attempting to comply
in short amounts of time with untenable regulatory provisions. Prior
notice and comment would be impracticable given the purpose of these
targeted amendments, which is to provide the immediate extension
required to address the problems identified above.
The EPA has determined that this rule may take effect immediately
upon publication because, in extending certain deadlines within the
2024 rule it ``relieves a restriction.'' 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1). Further,
for the reasons described above, there exists ``good cause'' for an
immediate effective date. 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3); 5 U.S.C. 808(2).
IV. Request for Comment
As explained in section III of this document, the EPA finds good
cause to issue this interim final rule without prior notice or
opportunity for public comment. However, the EPA is providing an
opportunity for the public to comment on the deadlines being extended
in the regulatory text changes being made by this action and, thus,
requests comment on the revisions described herein. The EPA is not
reopening for comment any provisions of the March 2024 final rule other
than the specific changes made in this interim final rule. The EPA will
review comments received and consider whether this action should be
revised, if appropriate, in response to comments received.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.
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 under
section 3(f)(1) of Executive Order (E.O.) 12866. Accordingly, it was
submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. Any
changes made in response to E.O. 12866 review have been documented in
the docket. The EPA prepared an analysis of the potential costs and
benefits associated with this action. This analysis, Economic Impact
Analysis for the Extension of Deadlines in the NSPS OOOOb and EG OOOOc,
is available in the docket.
In the analysis, we present the estimated present values (PV) and
equivalent annualized values (EAV) of the estimated cost savings of
delaying compliance with the EG OOOOc (via extending the state plan
submittal deadline) in 2024 dollars over the 2028 to 2039 period,
discounted to 2025. Those quantitative results can be found in the next
section. We acknowledge, but do not quantify, the cost savings to
states resulting from having an additional year to develop state plans
to implement the EG OOOOc.
Under the IFR, we anticipate disbenefits associated with additional
emissions and lost value of captured natural gas because of delayed
compliance with EG OOOOc. Specifically, we estimate climate damages
from increasing methane emissions by 1,300,000 short tons, lost value
of PM2.5 and ozone-related health benefits from increasing
VOC emissions by 350,000 short tons, and lost value of benefits from
increasing HAP emissions by 13,000 short tons. In addition, we estimate
present values of the lost value of natural gas of $170 million using a
3 percent discount rate and $280 million using a 7 percent discount
rate.
B. Executive Order 14192: Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation
This action is considered an Executive Order 14192 deregulatory
action. Details on the estimated cost savings of this final rule can be
found in the EPA's analysis of the potential costs and benefits
associated with this action. Table 3 presents the estimates of the
compliance cost savings of this action. The analysis horizon over which
the present value (PV) and equivalent annualized value (EAV) are
estimated is 2028 to 2039. We estimate the PV and EAV under 3 and 7
percent discount rates discounted back to 2025 in 2024 dollars.
Table 3--Present Value (PV) and Equivalent Annualized Value (EAV) of the Compliance Cost Savings
[Billion 2024$, discounted to 2025]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 Percent discount rate 7 Percent discount rate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PV EAV PV EAV
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0.75................................................ 0.08 1.38 0.18
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose any new information collection burden
under the PRA. On June 28, 2024, the information collection activities
for NSPS OOOOb and EG OOOOc were approved by OMB under the PRA.\52\ The
ICR document that the EPA prepared has been assigned OMB Control No.
2060-0721 and EPA ICR number 2523.07. You can find a copy of the
previously submitted ICR in EPA-HQ-OAR-2021-0317.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewICR?ref_nbr=202405-2060-001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This action does not change the information collection
requirements.
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
This action is not subject to the RFA. The RFA applies only to
rules subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the
APA, 5 U.S.C. 553, or any other statute. This rule is not
[[Page 35981]]
subject to notice and comment requirements because the Agency has
invoked the APA ``good cause'' exemption under 5 U.S.C. 553(b).
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (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. This action imposes
no enforceable duty on any state, local or tribal governments or the
private sector. This action extends certain deadlines in the March 2024
final rule.
F. 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
action extends the deadline for state plan submittals, which will allow
additional time for states to develop plans. However, this action does
not alter the substantive requirements related to the content of state
plans.
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. This action will implement extension of certain
deadlines in the March 2024 final rule. Thus, Executive Order 13175
does not apply to this action.
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because the EPA
does not believe the environmental health risks or safety risks
addressed by this action present a disproportionate risk to children.
The EPA contends that the environmental health risks or safety risks
addressed by this action do not present a disproportionate risk to
children because other regulations are sufficiently protective of
children's health. This action does not affect the level of public
health and environmental protection already being provided by existing
NAAQS and other mechanisms in the CAA. Nor does this action result in
any changes to the control of air pollutants. This action does not
affect applicable local, state, or Federal permitting or air quality
management programs that will continue to address areas with degraded
air quality and maintain the air quality in areas meeting current
standards. Areas that need to reduce criteria air pollution to meet the
NAAQS will still need to rely on control strategies to reduce
emissions. The EPA does not believe this decrease in emission
reductions projected from this action will have a disproportionate
adverse effect on children's health.
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations 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. In the Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA)
accompanying the 2024 final rule, the EPA used a set of supply and
demand price elasticities to estimate the impacts of the rule on the
United States energy system (see section 4.1.4 of that document). The
EPA estimated maximum production reductions of about 41.4 million
barrels of crude oil (1.05 percent of projected baseline production)
and 272.5 million Mcf (thousand cubic feet) per year (0.75 percent).
This final rule is estimated to result in a decrease in total
compliance costs, with the reduction in costs affecting the affected
entities under EG subpart OOOOc, which the EPA expects will attenuate
the impacts estimated for the 2024 final rule RIA.
J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) and 1 CFR
Part 51
This action does not involve technical standards; therefore, the
NTTAA does not apply.
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action meets the criteria described at 5 U.S.C. 804(2), and
the EPA will submit a rule report to each House of the Congress and to
the Comptroller General of the United States. The CRA allows the
issuing agency to make a rule effective sooner than otherwise provided
by the CRA if the agency makes a good cause finding that notice and
comment rulemaking procedures are impracticable, unnecessary, or
contrary to the public interest (5 U.S.C. 808(2)). The EPA has made a
good cause finding for this action as discussed in section III of this
document, including the basis for that finding.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 60
Environmental protection, Administrative practices and procedures,
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Lee Zeldin,
Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Environmental
Protection Agency amends part 60 of title 40, chapter I, of the Code of
Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 60--STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE FOR NEW STATIONARY SOURCES
0
1. The authority citation for part 60 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart OOOO--Standards of Performance for Crude Oil and Natural
Gas Facilities for Which Construction, Modification, or
Reconstruction Commenced After August 23, 2011, and On or Before
September 18, 2015
0
2. Amend Sec. 60.5371 by adding two sentences before the first
sentence of the introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 60.5371 What standards apply to super-emitter events?
The provisions of this section will not apply between July 31,
2025, and January 22, 2027. The provisions of this section will apply
after January 22, 2027. * * *
* * * * *
Subpart OOOOa--Standards of Performance for Crude Oil and Natural
Gas Facilities for Which Construction, Modification or
Reconstruction Commenced After September 18, 2015 and On or Before
December 6, 2022
0
3. Amend Sec. 60.5371a by adding two sentences before the first
sentence of the introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 60.5371a What standards apply to super-emitter events?
The provisions of this section will not apply between July 31,
2025, and January 22, 2027. The provisions of this section will apply
after January 22, 2027. * * *
* * * * *
Subpart OOOOb--Standards of Performance for Crude Oil and Natural
Gas Facilities for Which Construction, Modification or
Reconstruction Commenced After December 6, 2022
0
4. Amend Sec. 60.5365b by revising paragraph (e)(2)(i) introductory
text and paragraphs (e)(2)(ii) and (e)(3)(ii)(C) and (D) to read as
follows:
[[Page 35982]]
Sec. 60.5365b Am I subject to this subpart?
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(2) * * *
(i) Beginning January 22, 2027, or upon startup, whichever is
later, for purposes of determining the applicability of a storage
vessel tank battery as an affected facility, a legally and practicably
enforceable limit must include the elements provided in paragraphs
(e)(2)(i)(A) through (F) of this section.
* * * * *
(ii) For each tank battery located at a well site or centralized
production facility, you must determine the potential for VOC and
methane emissions within 30 days after startup of production, or within
30 days after an action specified in paragraphs (e)(3)(i) and (ii) of
this section, except as provided in paragraph (e)(5)(iv) of this
section. Beginning January 22, 2027, the potential for VOC and methane
emissions must be calculated using a generally accepted model or
calculation methodology that accounts for flashing, working, and
breathing losses, based on the maximum average daily throughput to the
tank battery determined for a 30-day period of production.
* * * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) * * *
(C) Beginning January 22, 2027, or upon startup, whichever is
later, for tank batteries at well sites or centralized production
facilities, an existing tank battery receives additional crude oil,
condensate, intermediate hydrocarbons, or produced water throughput
from actions, including but not limited to, the addition of operations
or a production well, or changes to operations or a production well
(including hydraulic fracturing or refracturing of the well).
(D) Beginning January 22, 2027, or upon startup, whichever is
later, for tank batteries not located at a well site or centralized
production facility, including each tank battery at compressor stations
or onshore natural gas processing plants, an existing tank battery
receives additional fluids which cumulatively exceed the throughput
used in the most recent (i.e., prior to an action in paragraph
(e)(3)(ii)(A), (B), or (D) of this section) determination of the
potential for VOC or methane emissions.
* * * * *
0
5. Amend Sec. 60.5370b by revising paragraph (a) introductory text and
paragraphs (a)(4) and (5) and adding paragraphs (a)(8) and (9) to read
as follows:
Sec. 60.5370b When must I comply with this subpart?
(a) You must be in compliance with the standards of this subpart no
later than May 7, 2024, or upon initial startup, whichever date is
later, except as specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section for
reciprocating compressor affected facilities, paragraphs (a)(2) and (3)
of this section for storage vessel affected facilities, paragraph
(a)(4) of this section for process unit equipment affected facilities
at onshore natural gas processing plants, paragraph (a)(5) of this
section for process controllers, paragraph (a)(6) of this section for
pumps, paragraph (a)(7) of this section for centrifugal compressor
affected facilities, paragraph (a)(8) of this section for enclosed
combustion devices, paragraph (a)(9) of this section for enclosed
combustion devices or flares, and paragraphs Sec. 60.5377b(b) or (c)
for associated gas wells.
* * * * *
(4) Except as specified in paragraph (a)(4)(i) and (ii) of this
section, you must comply with the requirements of Sec. 60.5400b or as
an alternative, the requirements in Sec. 60.5401b, for all process
unit equipment affected facilities at a natural gas processing plant,
as soon as practicable but no later than 180 days after the initial
startup of the process unit.
(i) If complying with Sec. 60.5400b, beginning January 22, 2027,
or 180 days after startup, whichever is later, you must comply with the
requirements of Sec. 60.5400b(h)(2)(ii).
(ii) If complying with Sec. 60.5401b, beginning January 22, 2027,
or 180 days after startup, whichever is later, you must comply with the
requirements of Sec. 60.5401b(i)(2)(ii).
(5) For process controller affected facilities, you must comply
with the requirements of paragraph (a)(5)(i) or (ii) of this section,
as applicable.
(i) Any process controller affected facilities may comply with
Sec. 60.5390b(b)(1) and (2) or (3) as an alternative to compliance
with Sec. 60.5390b(a) until January 22, 2027.
(ii) On or after January 22, 2027, process controller affected
facilities must comply with Sec. 60.5390b(a) or (b), as specified in
those paragraphs.
* * * * *
(8) For an enclosed combustion device, you must comply with the
requirements of paragraph (a)(8)(i) of this section, as applicable.
(i) Beginning January 22, 2027, or 180 days after startup,
whichever is later, you must comply with the performance testing
procedures of Sec. 60.5413b(b).
(ii) [Reserved]
(9) For an enclosed combustion device or for a flare, you must
comply with the requirements of paragraph (a)(9)(i), (ii), or (iii) of
this section, as applicable.
(i) Beginning November 28, 2025, or 180 days after startup,
whichever is later, you must comply with the continuous monitoring
systems requirements of Sec. 60.5417b(d)(8)(i) through (iv).
(ii) Beginning May 7, 2024 or 180 days after startup, whichever is
later, you must comply with the visible emission observation
requirements of Sec. 60.5417b(d)(8)(v).
(iii) Beginning November 28, 2025, or 180 days after startup,
whichever is later, you must comply with the continuous monitoring
systems requirements of Sec. 60.5417b(d)(8)(vi) for enclosed
combustion devices or flares that are air-assisted or steam-assisted.
* * * * *
0
6. Amend Sec. 60.5371b by adding two sentences before the first
sentence of the introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 60.5371b What GHG and VOC standards apply to super-emitter
events?
The provisions of this section will not apply between July 31,
2025, and January 22, 2027. The provisions of this section will apply
after January 22, 2027. * * *
* * * * *
0
7. Amend Sec. 60.5375b by revising paragraphs (a)(2) and (f)(3)(i) and
(ii) to read as follows:
Sec. 60.5375b What GHG and VOC standards apply to well completions at
well affected facilities?
(a) * * *
(2) If it is technically infeasible to route the recovered gas as
required in paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this section, then you must capture
and direct recovered gas to a completion combustion device, except in
conditions that may result in a fire hazard or explosion, or where high
heat emissions from a completion combustion device may negatively
impact tundra, permafrost or waterways. After January 22, 2027,
completion combustion devices must be equipped with a reliable
continuous pilot flame.
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(3) * * *
(i) Route all flowback to a completion combustion device, except in
conditions that may result in a fire hazard or explosion, or where high
heat emissions from a completion combustion device may negatively
impact tundra, permafrost or waterways. After January 22, 2027,
completion combustion
[[Page 35983]]
devices must be equipped with a reliable continuous pilot flame.
(ii) Route all flowback into one or more well completion vessels
and commence operation of a separator unless it is technically
infeasible for a separator to function. You must have the separator
onsite or otherwise available for use at the wildcat well, delineation
well, or low pressure well. The separator must be available and ready
for use to comply with paragraph (f)(3)(ii) of this section during the
entirety of the flowback period. Any gas present in the flowback before
the separator can function is not subject to control under this
section. Capture and direct recovered gas to a completion combustion
device, except in conditions that may result in a fire hazard or
explosion, or where high heat emissions from a completion combustion
device may negatively impact tundra, permafrost, or waterways. After
January 22, 2027, completion combustion devices must be equipped with a
reliable continuous pilot flame.
* * * * *
0
8. Amend Sec. 60.5390b by revising paragraph (a) introductory text to
read as follows:
Sec. 60.5390b What GHG and VOC standards apply to process controller
affected facilities?
* * * * *
(a) Beginning January 22, 2027, or upon startup, whichever is
later, you must design and operate each process controller affected
facility with zero methane and VOC emissions to the atmosphere, except
as provided in paragraph (b) of this section.
* * * * *
0
9. Amend Sec. 60.5398b by revising paragraph (d)(1)(iii) to read as
follows:
Sec. 60.5398b What alternative GHG and VOC standards apply to
fugitive emissions components affected facilities and what inspection
and monitoring requirements apply to covers and closed vent systems
when using an alternative technology?
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(1) * * *
(iii) Within 270 days of receipt of an alternative test method
request that was determined to be complete, the Administrator will
determine whether the requested alternative test method is adequate for
indicating compliance with the requirements for monitoring fugitive
emissions components affected facilities in Sec. 60.5397b and
continuous inspection and monitoring of covers and closed vent systems
in Sec. 60.5416b and/or for identifying super-emitter events in Sec.
60.5371b, except that the Administrator is not required to make
determinations on such requests for methods for identifying super
emitter events in Sec. 60.5371b before January 22, 2027. The
Administrator will issue either an approval or disapproval in writing
to the submitter. Approvals may be considered site-specific or more
broadly applicable. Broadly applicable alternative test methods and
approval letters will be posted at https://www.epa.gov/emc/oil-and-gas-approved-alternative-test-methods-approvals. If the Administrator fails
to provide the submitter a decision on approval or disapproval within
270 days, the alternative test method will be given conditional
approval status and posted on this same web page, except that
conditional approval will not be given for purposes of identifying
super-emitter events in Sec. 60.5371b before January 22, 2027. If the
Administrator finds any deficiencies in the request and disapproves the
request in writing, the owner or operator may choose to revise the
information and submit a new request for an alternative test method.
* * * * *
0
10. Amend Sec. 60.5411b by revising paragraphs (a)(3) and (b)(4) to
read as follows:
Sec. 60.5411b What additional requirements must I meet to determine
initial compliance for my covers and closed vent systems?
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(3) Beginning January 22, 2027, or upon startup, whichever is
later, you must design and operate the closed vent system with no
identifiable emissions as demonstrated by Sec. 60.5416b(a) and (b).
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(4) Beginning January 22, 2027 or upon startup, whichever is later,
you must design and operate the cover with no identifiable emissions as
demonstrated by Sec. 60.5416b(a) and (b), except when operated as
provided in paragraphs (b)(2)(i) through (iv) of this section.
* * * * *
0
11. Amend Sec. 60.5412b by revising paragraphs (a)(1)(viii),
(a)(3)(viii), and (d)(5) to read as follows:
Sec. 60.5412b What additional requirements must I meet for
determining initial compliance of my control devices?
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(viii) After January 22, 2027, you must install and operate a
continuous burning pilot or combustion flame. After January 22, 2027,
an alert must be sent to the nearest control room whenever the pilot or
combustion flame is unlit.
* * * * *
(3) * * *
(viii) After January 22, 2027, you must install and operate a
continuous burning pilot or combustion flame. After January 22, 2027,
an alert must be sent to the nearest control room whenever the pilot or
combustion flame is unlit.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(5) If the alternative test method demonstrates compliance with the
metrics specified in paragraphs (d)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section
instead of demonstrating continuous compliance with 95.0 percent or
greater combustion efficiency, after January 22, 2027, you must still
install the pilot or combustion flame monitoring system required by
Sec. 60.5417b(d)(8)(i). If the alternative test method demonstrates
continuous compliance with a combustion efficiency of 95.0 percent or
greater, the requirement in Sec. 60.5417b(d)(8)(i) no longer applies.
0
12. Amend Sec. 60.5413b by revising paragraph (e)(2) to read as
follows:
Sec. 60.5413b What are the performance testing procedures for
control devices?
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(2) After January 22, 2027, a pilot or combustion flame must be
present at all times of operation. After January 22, 2027, an alert
must be sent to the nearest control room whenever the pilot or
combustion flame is unlit.
* * * * *
0
13. Amend Sec. 60.5415b by revising paragraph (f)(1)(vii)(A)(1) and
paragraph (h)(1) introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 60.5415b How do I demonstrate continuous compliance with the
standards for each of my affected facilities?
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(1) * * *
(vii) * * *
(A) * * *
(1) After January 22, 2027, a pilot or combustion flame must be
present at all times of operation. After January 22, 2027, an alert
must be sent to the nearest control room whenever the pilot or
combustion flame is unlit.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(1) Beginning January 22, 2027, or upon startup, whichever is
later, you must demonstrate that your process controller affected
facility does not emit any VOC or methane to the atmosphere
[[Page 35984]]
by meeting the requirements of paragraph (h)(1)(i) or (ii) of this
section.
* * * * *
0
14. Amend Sec. 60.5416b by revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (2) and
(a)(3)(i) and paragraph (b) introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 60.5416b What are the initial and continuous cover and closed
vent system inspection and monitoring requirements?
* * * * *
(a) * * *
(1) For each closed vent system joint, seam, or other connection
that is permanently or semi-permanently sealed (e.g., a welded joint
between two sections of hard piping or a bolted and gasketed ducting
flange), you must meet the requirements specified in paragraphs
(a)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section.
(i) Within the first 30 calendar days after January 22, 2027, or
upon startup of the affected facility routing emissions through the
closed vent system, whichever is later, conduct an initial inspection
according to the test methods and procedures specified in paragraph (b)
of this section to demonstrate that the closed vent system operates
with no identifiable emissions.
(ii) Conduct annual visual inspections for defects that could
result in air emissions. Defects include, but are not limited to,
visible cracks, holes, or gaps in piping; loose connections; liquid
leaks; or broken or missing caps or other closure devices. Beginning on
the first annual inspection after January 22, 2027, and for all annual
inspections thereafter, you must monitor a component or connection
using the test methods and procedures in paragraph (b) of this section
to demonstrate that it operates with no identifiable emissions
following any time the component is repaired or replaced or the
connection is unsealed.
(iii) Conduct AVO inspections in accordance with and at the same
frequency as specified for fugitive emissions components affected
facilities located at the same type of site as specified in Sec.
60.5397b(g). Process unit equipment affected facilities must conduct
annual AVO inspections concurrent with the inspections required by
paragraph (a)(1)(ii) of this section.
(2) For closed vent system components other than those specified in
paragraph (a)(1) of this section, you must meet the requirements of
paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through (iv) of this section.
(i) Conduct an initial inspection according to the test methods and
procedures specified in paragraph (b) of this section within the first
30 calendars days after startup of the affected facility routing
emissions through the closed vent system or January 22, 2027, whichever
is later, to demonstrate that the closed vent system operates with no
identifiable emissions.
(ii) Beginning January 22, 2027, conduct inspections according to
the test methods, procedures, and frequencies specified in paragraph
(b) of this section to demonstrate that the components or connections
operate with no identifiable emissions.
(iii) Conduct annual visual inspections for defects that could
result in air emissions. Defects include, but are not limited to,
visible cracks, holes, or gaps in ductwork; loose connections; liquid
leaks; or broken or missing caps or other closure devices. Beginning
January 22, 2027, you must monitor a component or connection using the
test methods and procedures in paragraph (b) of this section to
demonstrate that it operates with no identifiable emissions following
any time the component is repaired or replaced or the connection is
unsealed.
(iv) Conduct AVO inspections in accordance with and at the same
frequency as specified for fugitive emissions components affected
facilities located at the same type of site, as specified in Sec.
60.5397b(g). Process unit equipment affected facilities must conduct
annual AVO inspections concurrent with the inspections required by
paragraph (a)(2)(iii) of this section.
(3) * * *
(i) Beginning January 22, 2027, conduct the inspections specified
in paragraphs (a)(3)(ii) through (iv) of this section to identify
defects that could result in air emissions and to ensure the cover
operates with no identifiable emissions. Defects include, but are not
limited to, visible cracks, holes, or gaps in the cover, or between the
cover and the separator wall; broken, cracked, or otherwise damaged
seals or gaskets on closure devices; and broken or missing hatches,
access covers, caps, or other closure devices. In the case where the
storage vessel is buried partially or entirely underground, you must
inspect only those portions of the cover that extend to or above the
ground surface, and those connections that are on such portions of the
cover (e.g., fill ports, access hatches, gauge wells, etc.) and can be
opened to the atmosphere.
* * * * *
(b) No identifiable emissions test methods and procedures. If you
are required to conduct an inspection of a closed vent system and cover
as specified in paragraph (a)(1), (2), or (3) of this section or Sec.
60.5398b(b), you must meet the requirements of paragraphs (b)(1)
through (9) of this section after January 22, 2027. You must meet the
requirements of paragraphs (b)(1), (2), (4), and (9) of this section
for each self-contained process controller at your process controller
affected facility as specified at Sec. 60.5390b(a)(2).
* * * * *
0
15. Amend Sec. 60.5417b by revising paragraphs (d)(8)(i) and (i)(6)(v)
to read as follows:
Sec. 60.5417b What are the continuous monitoring requirements for my
control devices?
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(8) * * *
(i) After January 22, 2027, continuously monitor at least once
every five minutes 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. After January
22, 2027, an alert must be sent to the nearest control room whenever
the pilot or combustion flame is unlit. 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 section.
* * * * *
(i) * * *
(6) * * *
(v) After January 22, 2027, if required by paragraph (i)(5) of this
section to install a pilot or combustion flame monitoring system, a
deviation occurs when there is no indication of the presence of a pilot
or combustion flame for any 5-minute period.
* * * * *
Subpart OOOOc--Emissions Guidelines for Greenhouse Gas Emissions
From Existing Crude Oil and Natural Gas Facilities
0
16. Amend Sec. 60.5362c by revising paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 60.5362c Am I affected by this subpart?
* * * * *
(c) You must submit the state or Tribal plan or negative
declaration letter to EPA by January 22, 2027.
0
17. Revise Sec. 60.5368c to read as follows:
[[Page 35985]]
Sec. 60.5368c What if my state or Tribal plan is not approvable?
If you do not submit a state or Tribal plan (or a negative
declaration letter) by January 22, 2027, or if EPA disapproves your
state plan, EPA will develop a Federal plan according to Sec.
60.27a(c) through (f) to implement the emission guidelines contained in
this subpart.
0
18. Amend Sec. 60.5374c by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 60.5374c Does this subpart directly affect designated facility
owners and operators in my state?
* * * * *
(b) If you do not submit a plan to implement and enforce the
guidelines contained in this subpart by the date specified in Sec.
60.5352c, or if EPA disapproves your plan, the EPA will implement and
enforce a Federal plan, as provided in Sec. 60.5368c, to ensure that
each designated facility within your state that commenced construction,
modification or reconstruction on or before December 6, 2022, reaches
compliance with all the provisions of this subpart by the dates
specified in Sec. 60.5360c.
[FR Doc. 2025-14531 Filed 7-30-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P