Spilman Thomas & Battle Logo :: 1-800-967-8251

www.spilmanlaw.com


Contact Spilman's Marcellus Shale Practice Group 

 

1-800-967-8251

M. Katherine Crockett PhotoM. Katherine Crockett
Associate

kcrockett@spilmanlaw.com
EPA Issues Final GHG Reporting Rule for Oil and Gas Industry

   On November 8, 2010, the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") finalized reporting requirements for the petroleum and natural gas industry sector under its Mandatory Greenhouse Gas ("GHG") Reporting Rule, which are located in Subpart W of 40 C.F.R. Part 98 ("Subpart W"). Subpart W imposes substantial new obligations relating to the monitoring, calculation and reporting of GHG emissions by covered members of the industry, often from emissions sources that historically never have been subject to federal air regulations. The applicability threshold, specialized definitions and lack of a de minimis exemption in Subpart W ensure far-ranging practical and financial impacts for the industry, including small onshore producers and operators of marginal wells.

 

    The final rule applies to onshore petroleum natural gas production facilities, onshore natural gas processing plants and onshore natural gas transmission compression facilities, as well as to the following industry segments: offshore petroleum and natural gas production, underground natural gas storage, liquefied natural gas ("LNG") storage, LNG import and export, and natural gas distribution. Under the rule, facilities emitting 25,000 or more metric tons per year of carbon dioxide equivalent ("CO2e") must calculate and report their GHG emissions from specified emissions sources. Because the GHG of primary concern for the oil and gas industry is methane, however, this applicability threshold will be considerably lower than 25,000 tons because methane has a global warming potential 21x greater than carbon dioxide (i.e., one ton of methane is equivalent to 21 CO2e).

 

    Perhaps most significantly, the final rule retains the basin-wide definition of "facility" for the onshore production segment that was contained in the proposed rule, which many industry sources challenged as fundamentally unworkable. Specifically, a single onshore production "facility" is defined to include all petroleum or natural gas equipment on a well pad or associated with a well pad and CO2 enhanced oil recovery operations that are under common ownership or control and that are located in a single hydrocarbon basin as defined by the American Association of Petroleum Geologists ("AAPG").*  Because the reporting entity for purposes of onshore production is the entity holding the state drilling permit, where a permit holder operates more than one well in a particular basin, all wells and their associated equipment would be considered a single "facility," and the GHG emissions associated with those wells must be aggregated to determine the applicability of the rule. Taken together, these definitions mean that a particular company will only have one onshore production "facility" per basin, regardless of the number, interconnectedness or proximity of the wells involved. Compounding this issue, many of these AAPG basins are very large and cover several states-- West Virginia, for example, is divided into two basins that extend beyond the State's borders to encompass much of the Appalachian region. Obviously, the likelihood of surpassing the 25,000 CO2e applicability threshold will increase with the size of the relevant basin. Due to the varied number of specific emissions sources at individual well pads, GHG emissions from well pads will be highly variable and difficult to generalize;**  however, operators of numerous wells within a single basin, particularly wells with large production volumes and significant associated equipment, should evaluate carefully the potential applicability of the rule.

 

    With regard to specific requirements, Subpart W requires covered facilities to report carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) from equipment leaks and venting, and CO2, CH4 and nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions from gas flares and combustion sources. Calculation methodologies generally include the use of engineering estimates, emissions modeling software and emissions factors, though direct measurement is still required for certain emissions sources when other methods are not feasible. Consistent with previously finalized GHG reporting rules for other industry sectors, reporters meeting specific criteria may use best available monitoring methods for certain emissions sources for a limited period during the 2011 reporting year, rather than the methodologies specified in the final rule. Approved "best available" methods include monitoring methods currently in use by the facility that do not meet Subpart W's specifications, supplier data, engineering calculations or other company records. 

 

    EPA has estimated that implementation of Subpart W by the industry will cost an average of $16,000 per facility in the first year and $7,000 per facility annually thereafter. Various members of the industry, however, have rejected EPA's cost estimate as drastically understating-according to some analyses, by at least two orders of magnitude-the financial burden that compliance with the rule will place on individual oil and gas companies, and particularly smaller businesses. The result, according to industry organizations, is a significantly disparate impact on the oil and gas industry vis-à-vis other industry sectors subject to reporting obligations under other sections of EPA's mandatory GHG reporting program.

 

    EPA's issuance of Subpart W so late in 2010 has left very little time for facilities subject to the rule to make their initial applicability determinations and undertake whatever preparatory steps are necessary before it becomes effective. Covered sources are required to begin data collection on January 1, 2011, with the first annual report to be submitted on March 31, 2012, for calendar year 2011 emissions. Companies potentially affected by the final rule are encouraged to take quick action to make a formal determination regarding Subpart W's applicability before the rule's requirements take effect. EPA plans to develop voluntary screening tools for the industry to assist potential reporters in determining the applicability of Subpart W, which the agency anticipates will be based on easily determined inputs such as major equipment or operational counts. Generally, these applicability tools would only serve as a guide to identify those facilities that are clearly well below or well above the reporting threshold, while those facilities that are close to the threshold and will need to collect further information to confirm whether they fall within the scope of Subpart W.

 

    Additional information regarding Subpart W is available at EPA's website. We will be happy to assist in interpreting the requirements of this important new rule.

 

*In an important clarification actively sought by industry, EPA has emphasized that this definition of "facility" for onshore production facilities is limited to Subpart W and does not impact other EPA air regulations. Nevertheless, this definition may set a troubling precedent regarding the legitimacy and viability of aggregating emissions from multiple wells in future air-related regulatory efforts.

**In EPA's analysis of average emissions associated with individual well pads, emissions ranged from 370 metric tpy CO2e (so that approximately 68 wells equals 25,000 metric tpy CO2e) to approximately 4927 metric tpy CO2e (so that approximately five wells equals 25,000 metric tpy CO2e). EPA, Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting from the Petroleum and Natural Gas Industry: Background Technical Support Document, p. 31. Some very low-producing wells may have annual emissions that fall below EPA's low-end estimate.

 

A version of this article was printed in the December 2010 edition of IOGA News, a publication of The Independent Oil and Gas Association of West Virginia, Inc. 

In the News
Flame Marker

Welcome!

from Andrew B. McCallister   

Executive Editor & Senior Attorney

 

Welcome to your new and improved "Marcellus Fairway: The Play Today." This is our first edition of 2011, and we hope this finds you well into a healthy, happy and prosperous New Year!

With a new year comes change, and much of this month's edition discusses  changes facing the industry on regulatory and legislative fronts. You may also notice that we have changed our format to make this e-newsletter easier to read. This new layout is a direct result of feedback from you, the reader. Thanks to tremendous input received on our recent "Reader Survey," we were able to redesign the look and feel of this publication. But we didn't stop there. We also brought innovation to the content. Here's what you will find:  more original content, provided by more Spilman authors.

Throughout the course of this year, you will be introduced to the entire cast of our Spilman Marcellus team, as they weigh in with valuable commentary from their respective areas of expertise. We will cover a wide range of Marcellus issues related to the law-and your business-ranging from labor & employment and OSHA compliance to environmental regulations, tax laws and government relations. I urge you to stay connected with us, as we keep you up to date on the important trends, issues, laws and technologies shaping the Marcellus Shale energy play.

Very best regards,
Drew
Flame Marker

Legislative Outlook: Pa.

by Ronald W. Schuler

Member
 

In the 2011 legislative session, Pennsylvania's new Republican governor, Tom Corbett, and its largely Republican legislature are likely to pick up where the last session left off with regard to Marcellus Shale issues.

The co-director of Governor Corbett's transition team, Leslie Gromis-Baker, recently publicly suggested that the Governor was considering establishing a Marcellus Shale commission to study matters for future legislation, but it remains to be seen whether the idea has any legs.

The primary issue left over from last session is the question of whether there will be a Marcellus Shale severance tax in Pennsylvania. Governor Corbett made a "no taxes/no fees" pledge during the campaign, but it is possible that a compromise will be reached whereby no revenue from a severance tax will end up going to the state. Instead, if passed, municipalities or counties would be the likely recipient of severance tax revenues, and the tax would likely be referred to as a "local impact fee," based on either the volume or value of produced gas, to assist local authorities in funding road and other infrastructure improvements directly related to Marcellus activity.

After several high-profile oil and gas production accidents in Pennsylvania and nearby in West Virginia last year, it is likely that Pennsylvania legislators will be moving to address drilling safety issues. Less certain is the fate of "forced pooling" legislation; while it is likely that some form of "forced pooling" legislation will come up for a vote during this session, the matter remains controversial, and it is anyone's guess whether it will pass.
Flame Marker

Legislative Outlook: W.Va.

by Michael J. Basile

Managing Member 


The 2011 Session of the West Virginia Legislature promises to be one of the most interesting in the state's history. The passing of U.S. Senator Robert C. Byrd in 2010 has led to a series of corresponding leadership changes in West Virginia's state and federal delegations. Further, perceived incongruities between state succession laws and West Virginia's Constitution have led interested parties to seek input and clarification from the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals. The Court, in turn, has mandated a general election to be held no later than November 15, 2011.

 

With the above as backdrop, the oil and gas industry in West Virginia can expect increased near-term scrutiny from both the legislative and executive branches. The legislative interim committee process has produced an omnibus regulatory bill. The West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection has likewise produced - with input from a diverse stakeholders group originally empowered by then Governor (now Senator) Joe Manchin - an omnibus bill that it intends to introduce early in the session. Among the issues percolating in the above bills, as well as generally at the legislature, are: fee increases to fund permitting and inspection; water management; impoundment design and approval; surface owner notice and comment requirements; pooling, unitization and co-tenancy; and reclamation requirements.

 

Also, consensus is building among elected and industry officials toward some form of Marcellus Development Act aimed at stimulating economic opportunity atop production in the region. Current visions include focus on ethane cracking site locations to support the chemical and polymer industries in West Virginia and beyond, inducing natural gas vehicle infrastructure and usage, and extraction technology research and development incentive portfolios. 

 

In short, these are exciting times in West Virginia - both as to politics and policy. And the above mentioned "Produce + Use + Here" shared vision has many - including me - excited about our future.

Flame Marker

Pa. Names New DEP Chief 

 
Governor Tom Corbett recently named Michael Krancer as head of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection. Krancer previously worked as a judge with the state's Environmental Hearing Board. Click here to read the full article.

Flame Marker

Useful Resource: Marcellus Mapping Technology 

 
Pennsylvania State University has developed a series of maps illustrating various aspects of the Marcellus Shale. The animated maps focusing on issued permits for and location of Marcellus wells clearly demonstrate the tremendous growth of activity in the Marcellus Fairway. To view the maps, click here.

Drew McCallister Photo

Marcellus Shale Team Member

Andrew B. (Drew) McCallister

Drew has extensive experience representing the oil and gas industry in environmental issues, including defense of enforcement actions and advice regarding regulatory changes on the state and federal levels. He has written numerous articles on environmental issues facing the industry as a result of increasing state and federal agency interest in the exploration and production activities in the Marcellus Shale. Drew is a Senior Attorney in Spilman's Charleston office. For more information, click here.

 
Excellence. Value. Get There.
www.spilmanlaw.com  |  Print

 

Please be aware that this email publication is distributed with the understanding that the author, publisher and distributor are not rendering legal or other professional advice on specific facts or matters and, accordingly, assume no liability whatsoever in connection with its use.

Responsible Attorney: Michael J. Basile