Comments on Additional NSPS and MAC

Standards for Oil and Gas Production anProcessing Under the Clean Air Act

John 

Augu

Denver
Overview of Comments

• My Background• Summary of State Controls in CO an• Recent COGCC Controls Developed• Prior and Planned Studies of Air Em• New NSPS/MACT Controls Would R

State Choices in Their SIPs

2 Davis Graham & Stubbs LLP | www.dgslaw.com
John R. Jacus’ Backgrou

• 26 Years of Environmental Practice• B.A. in Environmental Policy – Stanf• J.D. – University of Colorado• Active in Every Ozone Rulemaking s

2004 for Oil & Gas Operators

• Brokered Broad Stakeholder Compr

in 2008

3 Davis Graham & Stubbs LLP | www.dgslaw.com
Summary of State Contro

• In Addition to Existing NSPS/MACT 

Standards applicable to oil & gas;

– Revised (3/10) WY Presumptive BACT for Oi– Revised Ozone SIP and State-only Provision– Lack of EPA Review of NSPS/MACT has not 

in Lack of Regulation in the States; and

– WY and CO Regulations Among the Most Re

Effective in VOC and HAP Control

4 Davis Graham & Stubbs LLP | www.dgslaw.com
Wyoming’s Revised 

Presumptive BACT Contr

• Measures Tailored to JPAD, CDA an

State-wide

• Controls on Tank Flash Emissions, D

Pneumatic Pumps and Controllers, WCompletions, Blowdown and VentingProduced Water Tanks

5 Davis Graham & Stubbs LLP | www.dgslaw.com
Colorado’s Revised Ozon

Control Provisions of Reg

• System-wide Condensate Tank Con

the NAA @ 90% and State- wide > 2

– Creates Incentive to Over-control– Provides Operational Flexibility

• Flares and VRUs at 95% DRE• Electronic or Human Surveillance• Dehys at 90% Control• State-wide RICE Controls

6 Davis Graham & Stubbs LLP | www.dgslaw.com
COGCC Controls (non-C

• Green Completion and Odor Contro

the Piceance Basin

• O&G Operations Subject to AQCC O

Control Regulation No. 2

• Use of Open-top Tanks Limited• Pit Flaring Very Limited• Use of Low-Bleed Pneumatics 

7 Davis Graham & Stubbs LLP | www.dgslaw.com
Prior and Planned Studie

• WY and CO Modeling for Ozone and 

SIPs

• Modeling for BLM Resource Manage

Plans Under FLPMA

• WRAP Phase III Oil & Gas Inventory • COGA’s PARA Report of 2008• Planned Literature Review

8 Davis Graham & Stubbs LLP | www.dgslaw.com
Potential Conflict of State 

Federal Standards

• Want to Preserve System-wide Tank 

Controls in CO

• Inconsistency in Fed./State Regs Cr

Confusion for Operators

• State VOC Controls Also Control HA• New Federal HAP/VOC Controls no

Harmonized with Air Modeling

9 Davis Graham & Stubbs LLP | www.dgslaw.com
Existing Federal MACT 

Standards Protective

• 500 BBL/day threshold for Major So

MACT (Subpt. HH) is protective for Benzene, other HAPs, considering Capproved Emission Factors;

• This is Especially True with CO and 

VOC Controls in Place;

• Most Area Sources in Remote, 

Non-Urbanized Locations

10 Davis Graham & Stubbs LLP | www.dgslaw.com
Conclusion – Additional 

NSPS/MACT Controls Not Warranted

• Existing Federal Standards Protectiv• State Regs Further Control VOCs an

HAPs, Including Non-CAA Controls

• Federal Standards may Create Conf

and Aren’t Tailored to SIP Air Model

• Industry Data and Emissions Invento

Efforts Demonstrate No Need

• More Data Before New Regs 

11 Davis Graham & Stubbs LLP | www.dgslaw.com
For Questions, Contact:

John R. Jacus

(303) 892-7305

john.jacus@dgslaw.com

12

Davis Graham & Stubbs LLP | www.dgslaw.com