Page 1 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson signed the following document on September 15, 2011, and 

EPA is submitting it for publication in the Federal Register (FR). While we have taken steps to 

ensure the accuracy of this Internet version of the document, it is not the official version. Please 

refer to the official version in a forthcoming FR publication, which will appear on the 

Government Printing Office's FDSys website (http://fdsys.gpo.gov/fdsys/search/home.action). 

 {It will also appear on Regulations.gov (http://www.regulations.gov) in Docket No. EPA-HQOAR-2011-0417}.

6560.50 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 98 

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0417; FRL- XXXX-X] 

RIN 2060-AP99 

Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases: Petroleum and 

Natural Gas Systems: Revisions to Best Available Monitoring 

Method Provisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final Rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing amendments to certain 

provisions related to the use of best available monitoring 

methods for the Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems source 

category of the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule. 

Specifically, EPA is extending the time period during which 

owners and operators of facilities would be permitted to 

use best available monitoring methods in 2011, without 
Page 2 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

submitting a request to the Administrator for approval. 

EPA is also expanding the list of types of emissions 

sources for which owners and operators are not required to 

submit a request to the Administrator to use best available 

monitoring methods during 2011 and extending the deadline 

by which owners and operators of facilities can request use 

of best available monitoring methods for beyond 2011. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on September 30, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action 

under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0417. All documents in 

the docket are listed in the http://www.regulations.gov

index. 

Although listed in the index, some information may not 

be publicly available, e.g., confidential business 

information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and is 

publicly available in hard copy only. Publicly available 

docket materials are available either electronically 

through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the 

EPA's Docket Center, EPA/DC, EPA West Building, Room 3334, 

1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. This Docket 

Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday 
Page 3 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone 

number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and 

the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 566-1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carole Cook, Climate 

Change Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs (MC-6207J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., 

NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202) 343-

9263; fax number: (202) 343-2342; e-mail address: 

GHGReportingRule@epa.gov. For technical information and 

implementation materials, please go to the website 

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/subpart/w.html. 

To submit a question, select Rule Help Center, followed by 

“Contact Us.” 

Worldwide Web (WWW). In addition to being available 

in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0417, following the 

Administrator's signature, an electronic copy of this final 

rule will also be available through the WWW on EPA's 

Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program website at 

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/ghgrulemaking.ht

ml. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Regulated Entities. The Administrator determined that 

this action is subject to the provisions of Clean Air Act 
Page 4 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

(CAA) section 307(d). See CAA section 307(d)(1)(V) (the 

provisions of section 307(d) apply to “such other actions 

as the Administrator may determine”). This final rule 

affects owners or operators of petroleum and natural gas 

systems. Regulated categories and entities may include 

those listed in Table 1 of this preamble: 

Table 1. Examples of Affected Entities by Category 

Source 

Category NAICS Examples of affected facilities 

Petroleum and 

Natural Gas 

Systems 

486210 Pipeline transportation of 

natural gas. 

221210 Natural gas distribution 

facilities. 

211 Extractors of crude petroleum 

and natural gas. 

211112 Natural gas liquid extraction 

facilities. 

Table 1 of this preamble is not intended to be 

exhaustive, but rather provides a guide for readers 

regarding facilities likely to be affected by this action. 

Table 1 of this preamble lists the types of facilities of 

which EPA is aware could be potentially affected by the 

reporting requirements. Other types of facilities not 

listed in the table could also be affected. To determine 

whether you are affected by this action, you should 

carefully examine the applicability criteria found in 40 

CFR part 98, subpart W or the relevant criteria in the 

sections related to petroleum and natural gas systems. If 
Page 5 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

you have questions regarding the applicability of this 

action to a particular facility, consult the person listed 

in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

What is the effective date? The final rule is 

effective on September 30, 2011. Section 553(d) of the 

Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. Chapter 5, 

generally provides that rules may not take effect earlier 

than 30 days after they are published in the Federal 

Register. EPA is issuing this final rule under section CAA 

307(d)(1), which states: “The provisions of section 553 

through 557. . . of Title 5 shall not, except as expressly 

provided in this section, apply to actions to which this 

subsection applies.” Thus, section 553(d) of the APA does 

not apply to this rule. EPA is nevertheless acting 

consistently with the purposes underlying APA section 

553(d) in making this rule effective on September 30, 2011. 

Section 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) allows an effective date less 

than 30 days after publication “as otherwise provided by 

the agency for good cause found and published with the 

rule.” As explained below, EPA finds that there is good 

cause for this rule to become effective on or before 

September 30, 2011, even though this will result in an 
Page 6 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

effective date fewer than 30 days from the date of 

publication in the Federal Register. 

The purpose of the 30-day waiting period prescribed in 

5 U.S.C. 553(d) is to give affected parties a reasonable 

time to adjust their behavior and prepare before the final 

rule takes effect. That purpose, to provide affected 

parties a reasonable time to adjust to the rule before it 

comes into effect, is not necessary in this case, as this 

final rule avoids the need for affected parties to take 

action. 

Currently, according to the provisions in 76 FR 22825 

(April 25, 2011), owners and operators subject to 40 CFR 

part 98 may take advantage of automatic use of best 

available monitoring methods (BAMM) for parameters that 

cannot reasonably be measured according to the monitoring 

requirements in the rule through September 30, 2011. After 

September 30, 2011, owners and operators must follow all 

monitoring and quality assurance (QA) and quality control 

(QC) procedures in the rule unless the Administrator has 

approved using BAMM beyond that date. Finalizing this rule 

by September 30, 2011 enables owners and operators to 

automatically use BAMM through the end of 2011, without the 

need to request approval from the Administrator. If EPA 
Page 7 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

were not to finalize this rule by September 30, 2011, 

owners and operators would have to comply with all 

monitoring and QA/QC requirements as of October 1, 2011, 

which is the precise situation that this final rule is 

trying to avoid. Accordingly, EPA finds good cause exists 

to make this rule effective on September 30, 2011, 

consistent with the purposes of 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). 

Judicial Review. Under CAA section 307(b)(1), 

judicial review of this final rule is available only by 

filing a petition for review in the U.S. Court of Appeals 

for the District of Columbia Circuit (the Court) by [INSERT 

THE DATE 60 DAYS AFTER THE DATE OF PUBLICATION OF THE FINAL 

RULE IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER]. Under CAA section 

307(d)(7)(B), only an objection to this final rule that was 

raised with reasonable specificity during the period for 

public comment can be raised during judicial review. 

Section 307(d)(7)(B) of the CAA also provides a mechanism 

for EPA to convene a proceeding for reconsideration, “[i]f 

the person raising an objection can demonstrate to EPA that 

it was impracticable to raise such objection within [the 

period for public comment] or if the grounds for such 

objection arose after the period for public comment (but 

within the time specified for judicial review) and if such 
Page 8 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

objection is of central relevance to the outcome of the 

rule.” Any person seeking to make such a demonstration to 

us should submit a Petition for Reconsideration to the 

Office of the Administrator, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Room 3000, Ariel Rios Building, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460, with a copy to the person 

listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section, and the Associate General Counsel for the Air and 

Radiation Law Office, Office of General Counsel (Mail Code 

2344A), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20004. Note, under CAA section 

307(b)(2), the requirements established by this final rule 

may not be challenged separately in any civil or criminal 

proceedings brought by EPA to enforce these requirements. 

Acronyms and Abbreviations 

The following acronyms and abbreviations are used in 

this document. 

BAMM best available monitoring methods 

CAA Clean Air Act 

CBI confidential business information 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

EO Executive Order 

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

FR Federal Register 

GHG greenhouse gas 

ICR Information Collection Request 
Page 9 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

ISO International Organization for Standardization 

INGAA Interstate Natural Gas Association of America 

(INGAA) 

OMB Office of Management and Budget 

RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act 

RIA Regulatory Impact Analysis 

SBA Small Business Administration 

SBREFA Small Business Regulatory Enforcement and 

Fairness Act 

U.S. United States 

UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

USC United States Code 

WWW World Wide Web 

Table of Contents 

I. Background

A. Organization of this Preamble

B. Background on the Final Rule

C. Legal Authority

II. Use of BAMM under the Petroleum and Natural Gas 

Systems Source Category

A. Summary of BAMM Provisions under the Petroleum and 

Natural Gas Systems Source Category

B. Summary of Major Changes and Clarifications Since 

Proposal

C. Summary of Comments and Responses

III. Economic Impacts of the Rule

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review 

and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
Page 10 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that Significantly 

Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and LowIncome Populations

K. Congressional Review Act 

I. Background 

A. Organization of This Preamble 

This preamble consists of four sections. The first 

section provides a brief history of 40 CFR part 98, subpart 

W (“subpart W”). 

The second section of this preamble summarizes the 

revisions made to specific requirements for subpart W being 

incorporated into 40 CFR part 98 by this action. It also 

describes the major changes made to this source category 

since proposal and provides a brief summary of significant 

public comments and EPA’s responses. Additional responses 

to significant comments can be located in the document 

“Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases - Petroleum and 

Natural Gas Systems, Revisions to Best Available Monitoring 

Methods: EPA’s Response to Public Comments”. 

The third section of this preamble provides a 

statement regarding the economic impacts of the final rule. 
Page 11 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

Finally, the last section discusses the various 

statutory and executive order requirements applicable to 

this rulemaking.

B. Background on the Final Rule

This action finalizes amendments to best available 

monitoring method (BAMM) provisions in 40 CFR part 98, 

subpart W. EPA published Subpart W - Petroleum and Natural 

Gas Systems of the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule on 

November 30, 2010, 40 CFR part 98, subpart W (75 FR 74458). 

Included in the final rule were new provisions that were 

added in response to comments on the proposal (75 FR 18608, 

April 12, 2010) allowing owners and operators the option of 

using BAMM for specified parameters in 40 CFR 98.233 

Calculating GHG emissions. 

Following the publication of subpart W in the Federal 

Register, several industry groups sought reconsideration of 

several provisions in the final rule, including the 

provisions allowing BAMM. In a follow up action, EPA 

granted reconsideration and extended specific BAMM 

deadlines for 90 days in a rule that was signed on April 

20, 2011 (76 FR 22825). 

EPA then published a notice of proposed rulemaking to 

propose extending the time period for which owners and 
Page 12 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

operators of facilities could use BAMM during 2011 without 

submitting a request to the Administrator for approval, as 

well as broadening the emissions sources for which BAMM 

could be used. EPA also proposed extending the deadline 

for requesting BAMM for beyond 2011. The proposal was 

published on June 27, 2011 (76 FR 37300). The public 

comment period for the proposed rule amendments ended on 

July 27, 2011. EPA did not receive any requests to hold a 

public hearing. 

C. Legal Authority

EPA is promulgating these rule amendments under its 

existing CAA authority, specifically authorities provided 

in CAA section 114. 

As stated in the preamble to the 2009 final rule (74 

FR 56260, October 30, 2009), CAA section 114 provides EPA 

broad authority to require the information mandated by Part 

98 because such data would inform and are relevant to EPA’s 

obligation to carry out a wide variety of CAA provisions. 

As discussed in the preamble to the initial proposal (74 FR 

16448, April 10, 2009), CAA section 114(a)(1) authorizes 

the Administrator to require emissions sources, persons 

subject to the CAA, manufacturers of process or control 

equipment, and persons whom the Administrator believes may 
Page 13 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

have necessary information to monitor and report emissions 

and provide such other information the Administrator 

requests for the purposes of carrying out any provision of 

the CAA. For further information about EPA’s legal 

authority, see the preambles to the proposed and final 

rule, and Response to Comments Documents.

II. Use of BAMM under the Petroleum and Natural Gas 

Systems Source Category 

A. Summary of BAMM Provisions under the Petroleum and 

Natural Gas Systems Source Category

Subpart W of 40 CFR Part 98 includes provisions 

allowing owners and operators of facilities to use BAMM in 

lieu of specified data input requirements for determining 

GHG emissions in certain circumstances for specified 

emissions sources. Methods that constitute BAMM are: 

supplier data; monitoring methods currently used by the 

facility that do not meet the specifications of a relevant 

subpart; engineering calculations; and/or other company 

records. When using BAMM, the owner or operator must use 

the equations and calculation methods set forth in 40 CFR 

98.233, but may use BAMM to estimate the parameters in the 

equations as specified in the rule. Any obligation to 

report under 30 CFR 250.302 through 304 as applicable by 
Page 14 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

owners or operators of facilities reporting under the 

offshore petroleum and natural gas production industry 

segment of subpart W is not affected if such owners or 

operators choose to use BAMM. 

Well-related emissions (40 CFR 98.234(f)(2)). This 

group of emissions sources includes those well-related data 

that cannot reasonably be measured according to the 

monitoring and QA/QC requirements of subpart W, such as 

well testing, venting, and flaring. Sources that fall in 

this category may automatically use BAMM for calendar year 

2011 without requesting approval from the Administrator. 

Specified activity data (40 CFR 98.234(f)(3)). This 

group includes those activity data that cannot reasonably 

be obtained according to the monitoring and QA/QC 

requirements specified in subpart W, such as cumulative 

hours of venting, days, or times of operation. Sources 

that fall in this category may automatically use BAMM for 

calendar year 2011 without requesting approval from the 

Administrator. 

Leak Detection and Measurement (40 CFR 98.234(f)(4)). 

This group includes those emissions sources that require 

leak detection and/or measurement such as the measurement 

of equipment leaks from valves and connectors that cannot 
Page 15 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

reasonably be obtained. Sources that fall in this category 

may automatically use BAMM for calendar year 2011 without 

requesting approval from the Administrator. 

Additional Sources under 40 CFR 98.234(f)(5)(iv). 

This category is applicable to emission sources not covered 

under the previous three categories and includes instances 

in which the facility owner or operator is facing unique or 

unusual circumstances, such as data collection methods that 

do not meet safety regulations, technical infeasibility 

such as a compressor that would not normally be shut down 

for maintenance during that calendar year rendering the 

installation of a port or meter difficult, or requirements 

that are counter to specific laws or regulations that 

render owners or operators of the facility unable to meet 

the requirements of subpart W. These examples are 

illustrative only; there could be additional circumstances 

which are unique or unusual under which the source could 

legitimately use BAMM. Sources that fall in this category 

may automatically use BAMM for calendar year 2011 without 

requesting approval from the Administrator. 

Best available monitoring methods for use beyond 

December 31, 2011 for sources in 40 CFR 98.234(f)(2), 

(f)(3), (f)(4), and (f)(5)(iv). Owners and operators of 
Page 16 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

emission sources covered in 40 CFR 98.234(f)(2), (f)(3), 

(f)(4), and (f)(5)(iv) may submit a notice of intent to EPA 

by December 31, 2011 indicating an intent to request BAMM 

for beyond 2011. Owners and operators who submit a BAMM 

request consistent with 40 CFR 98.234(f)(8)(ii) by March 

30, 2012 who have also submitted a notice of intent by 

December 31, 2011 will automatically be granted BAMM 

through June 30, 2012, during which time EPA will review 

the BAMM request. If the BAMM request is for use of BAMM 

beyond June 30, 2012 and is approved by the Administrator, 

owners and operators would be allowed to use BAMM for the 

time period indicated in the EPA approval letter, but not 

beyond December 31, 2012 without submitting and obtaining 

the Administrator’s approval of a subsequent request for 

additional time. 

Owners and operators who submit such a notice of 

intent but do not follow up with a BAMM request by March 

30, 2012 are not allowed to use BAMM for 2012. They will 

have been expected to follow all monitoring and QA/QC 

requirements in the rule as of January 1, 2012. Although 

EPA expects that it will be unlikely to be necessary, these 

owners and operators could still request BAMM for 2013 and 
Page 17 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

beyond according to the procedures outlined in this 

preamble and rule. 

To use BAMM beyond December 31, 2012 (or such other 

shorter period as provided in an approval letter), or any 

year thereafter, owners and operators must submit a new 

request to use BAMM by September 30th of the preceding year 

or such other time as indicated by an approval letter. The 

request will be reviewed according to the criteria outlined 

in 40 CFR 98.234(f)(8), and if the information provided is 

to the Administrator’s satisfaction, approved. 

B. Summary of Major Changes and Clarifications Since 

Proposal

The major changes and clarifications in 40 CFR 

98.234(f) since the June 2011 proposal are identified in 

the following list. For a full description of the 

rationale for these and any other significant changes to 40 

CFR 98.234(f) of subpart W, please see below, as well as 

the “Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases - Petroleum 

and Natural Gas Systems, Revisions to Best Available 

Monitoring Method Provisions: EPA’s Response to Public 

Comments”. The changes are organized following the 

different sections of the subpart W regulatory text. 
Page 18 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

1. Emission Sources Covered by Best Available Monitoring 

Method Provisions

 EPA clarified the sources covered by BAMM for Leak 

Detection and Measurement in 40 CFR 98.234(f)(4) by 

including the statement that emission sources that can 

use BAMM are those for which leak detection/or 

measurement cannot reasonably be obtained. 

 EPA clarified availability of BAMM for sources not 

listed in paragraph 40 CFR 92.234 (f)(2), (f)(3), and 

(f)(4) by including the statement in 40 CFR 

98.234(f)(5)(iv) that such emission sources are those 

for which data cannot reasonably be obtained. 

2. Best Available Monitoring Methods Beyond 2011 for 

Sources Listed in 40 CFR 98.234(f)(2), (f)(3), (f)(4), and 

(f)(5)(iv).

 EPA revised the provisions for the use of BAMM beyond 

2011 by stating that EPA will approve BAMM for use for 

a maximum of one year. For subsequent years, owners 

and operators must again request to use BAMM. 

 EPA clarified provisions for the use of BAMM beyond 

2011 by replacing the term “facilities” with “owners 

and operators”. 

 EPA clarified that the BAMM request must include a 

description of the associated unique or unusual 

circumstances (rather than extreme) for each emissions 

source for which the request has been submitted. 

 EPA revised the approval criteria for the use of BAMM 

beyond December 31, 2011 to clarify that BAMM requests 

must clearly demonstrate why BAMM is needed, and must 

also include justifications for why the owner or 

operator cannot conform to requirements in subpart W. 

 

3. Handling Best Available Monitoring Method Late 

Submissions Requests 
Page 19 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

 EPA revised the language in 40 CFR 98.234(f)(1) to 

clarify that owners and operators who submit a BAMM 

request after the deadlines finalized in this action 

must demonstrate unique or unusual circumstances 

unforeseen at the time of the associated BAMM deadline 

specified in the rule. 

C. Summary of Comments and Responses

This section contains a brief summary of major 

comments and responses. EPA received seven sets of 

comments in response to the proposed revisions to the BAMM 

provisions. EPA’s responses to additional comments can be 

found in the comment response document, “Mandatory 

Reporting of Greenhouse Gases - Petroleum and Natural Gas 

Systems, Revisions to Best Available Monitoring Method 

Provisions: EPA’s Response to Public Comment”. 

1. Emission Sources Covered by BAMM 

Comment: EPA received mixed comments on the expansion 

of the automatic BAMM coverage beyond the sources listed in 

40 CFR 98.234(f)(2) and (f)(3), to sources listed in 40 CFR 

98.234(f)(4) (Leak Detection and Measurement), as well as 

other sources under 40 CFR 98.234(f)(5)(iv). Most 

commenters supported the expansion, stating that the 

extension of automatic use of BAMM to sources for which 

leak detection and measurement are required as well as 

other sources subject to subpart W for 2011 would provide 
Page 20 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

reporting entities time to fully implement the requirements 

of subpart W. A few commenters argued against expanding 

the use of automatic BAMM to all subpart W emissions 

sources in 2011 by stating that the extension was not 

appropriate for leak detection, because accurate 

information on leaking equipment lies at the core of 

subpart W and allowing BAMM for these measurements would 

undermine the utility of these data and obscure 

opportunities for facilities to both reduce emissions and 

save money. Further, commenters noted that the extension 

was not warranted because EPA did not provide a sufficient 

technical basis for such an extension. 

Response: In this action, EPA is extending the 

automatic use of BAMM to the emission sources covered in 40 

CFR 98.234(f)(2) through (4) and those covered in 

98.234(f)(5)(iv) based on EPA’s determination that this 

extension would assist reporters in the necessary 

preparations to come into full compliance with the rule. 

In a previous action (76 FR 22825, April 25, 2011), EPA 

amended the dates by which requests to use BAMM were to be 

submitted to the Agency. Based on the dates in that 

action, BAMM requests were to be submitted to the agency by 

July 31, 2011 for use of BAMM in calendar year 2011. To 
Page 21 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

date, EPA has received over 200 submissions from owners and 

operators of facilities either notifying EPA of the intent 

to submit a BAMM request or providing EPA with the full 

BAMM request. Most of these 200 submissions contain 

information for more than one facility subject to the rule. 

In some cases, for example, a single submission of a notice 

of intent received by EPA covered over 75 facilities. All 

together, the submissions reflected either notifications of 

intent (NOIs) or requests for BAMM from over 1900 

facilities. This is over half of the 2,800 facilities that 

EPA originally expected to report under subpart W. The 

sheer number of requests received indicates that there is a 

significant need for BAMM for the 2011 reporting year. 

Regarding commenters concern that there was no 

technical basis to allow use of BAMM for sources beyond 40 

CFR 98(f)(2), (f)(3) and (f)(4), a memo to the docket 

entitled “Supplemental Data Submitted on BAMM” demonstrates 

by specific examples justification for the extension to 

additional emissions sources, at least for the 2011 

reporting year. 

Commenters also were concerned that by allowing the 

use of BAMM, EPA would “undermine the utility of these data 

and obscure opportunities for facilities to both reduce 
Page 22 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

emissions and save money.” EPA recognizes that use of BAMM 

could result in some inconsistencies in how owners and 

operators calculate emissions for a specific facility. 

However, regulations for facility level monitoring for the 

petroleum and natural gas industry are a new and 

significant undertaking and will greatly improve the 

emissions estimates for this industry. For instance, 

although they are required to follow the calculation 

equations in the rule, owners and operators will have some 

flexibility in how they estimate the inputs to those 

equations. Nevertheless, although the input parameters are 

calculated using BAMM, the data obtained would be a 

significant improvement over current emissions estimation 

methods. 

For example, current source-level emissions estimates 

for the petroleum and natural gas industry are primarily 

available through the Inventory of U.S. GHG Emissions. 

Although the national level GHG Inventory and the GHG 

Reporting Program are very different and the programs have 

different goals and different levels of coverage of 

industry emissions, an understanding of the quality and 

availability of source-specific data in the national GHG 

inventory is germane to the comments raised. The national 
Page 23 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

GHG Inventory provides national level estimates and does 

not provide the level of granularity that will be available 

from the facility level GHG reports which will be available 

under the GHG Reporting Program. So, although facilities 

will be able to use BAMM, reporting facility-level data 

provides significant additional information on emissions in 

the industry above and beyond what is currently available. 

Second, the methods used to estimate facility-level 

emissions are an improvement over the national-level 

methods. In the national GHG Inventory, EPA relies on 

predominantly national level statistics and default 

emissions factors from a 1996 study titled “Methane 

Emissions from the Natural Gas Industry”1. For example, in 

the national GHG Inventory, emissions from tanks are 

estimated using an emission factor per barrel of crude oil/ 

condensate produced multiplied by the national volumes of 

crude oil/condensate produced. This emission factor was 

developed using outputs from 101 simulation runs of the API 

Tank model for certain types of crude/condensate input and 

separator pressure. However, this is not representative of 

the variation in crude oil/condensate qualities and 

 

1

 EPA/GRI (1996) Methane Emissions from the Natural Gas Industry. 

Prepared by Harrison, M., T. Shires, J. Wessels, and R. Cowgill, 

eds., Radian International LLC for National Risk Management Research 

Laboratory, Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division, Research 

Triangle Park, NC. EPA-600/R-96-080a. 
Page 24 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

separator pressure at oil and gas operations across the 

nation. Hence, although facilities may be able to use BAMM 

to estimate emissions from tanks, the emissions estimates 

reported using BAMM will nonetheless be an improvement over 

existing methods by providing additional information on the 

varying characteristics of oil and gas operations across 

the country, which is not available through the national 

inventory. 

In summary, EPA has concluded that granting automatic 

use of BAMM without approval for 2011 will still provide 

EPA with improved data from the industry, while providing 

owners and operators sufficient time to perform the 

necessary steps to ensure full compliance with subpart W. 

2. Use of BAMM Beyond 2011 

Comment: Several commenters argued against EPA’s 

proposal to extend the deadline for requesting use of BAMM 

beyond December 31, 2011 stating that the proposed 

provisions would greatly undermine the data reported under 

subpart W. Further, commenters stated that the reporting 

community did not push for this revision and it is 

therefore unwarranted.

Response: In this action, EPA is finalizing, as 

proposed, the two-phase approach that results in an initial 
Page 25 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

six-month extension of the date for requesting BAMM for 

2012. The two-phase approach is similar to the process 

used under 40 CFR part 98 for subparts P, X, and Y. As 

indicated at proposal, this automatic extension would be 

necessary because under the rule, facilities are only 

granted automatic BAMM through December 31, 2011. For 

facilities that are requesting BAMM for beyond 2011, BAMM 

must be extended automatically to provide EPA the time to 

review thoroughly the BAMM requests submitted for a period 

beyond 2011, while ensuring that the requesting facilities 

are not out of compliance with the rule during that review 

process. 

First and foremost, EPA notes that the 2010 final rule 

for subpart W allows requests for BAMM beyond 2011. 40 CFR 

98.234(f)(8) provides for BAMM post-2011 if those requests 

were submitted by September 30, 2011. The extension of the 

deadline for BAMM beyond 2011 was necessary for the same 

reasons that extension of automatic BAMM was necessary for 

2011; the substantial number of owners and operators 

requesting BAMM would require significant resources by 

reporters that EPA has concluded would be better applied to 

concentration on coming into compliance with the rule. 
Page 26 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

In addition, it is not accurate to say that industry 

did not request use of BAMM past 2011. For example, in its 

Petition for Reconsideration, the Interstate Natural Gas 

Association of America (INGAA) stated, “[t]here is no 

reasonable basis for ... denying BAMM to a facility already 

subject to reporting, that confronts an unpredictable 

facility or operational issue (e.g., low utilization) that 

precludes measurement, just because these events occur 

after September 30, 2011. These and other situations 

should be eligible for BAMM, and INGAA seeks 

reconsideration so EPA can offer BAMM to these otherwise 

stranded facilities and unaddressed future events.” 

Similarly, in its petition for reconsideration, the 

American Petroleum Institute (API) indicated that EPA 

should remove the September 30, 2011 deadline for 

requesting BAMM post-2011, relaying that BAMM should be 

considered for such time as there is a reasonable need for 

use of BAMM. Chesapeake Energy Corporation and the 

American Exploration and Production Council echoed similar 

needs to have BAMM beyond 2011 (and 2012). They indicated 

in their comments on this proposed rule that “EPA should 

anticipate that there may be some situations that are 

beyond companies' control, which would require additional 
Page 27 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

BAMM beyond June 2012. For example, if there is 

insufficient supply of necessary monitoring equipment or if 

there are unexpected equipment manufacturing delays that 

prevent a company from installing that necessary monitoring 

equipment until late 2012, EPA should allow that company to 

use BAMM until the equipment can be delivered and 

installed.” 

EPA has concluded that an initial six month extension 

of the September 30, 2011 deadline is necessary. Further, 

commenters did not provide any specific examples of how 

such an extension could undermine data quality. In fact, 

EPA has concluded that the additional six months will 

provide owners and operators additional time to visit their 

facilities and determine whether or not they actually need 

BAMM. EPA does not believe that all of the 1900 plus 

facilities that have currently requested BAMM or filed 

notices of intent to apply for BAMM actually need BAMM, but 

rather they have submitted a request (or notice of intent) 

because they have not had sufficient time to fully evaluate 

their BAMM needs. A six-month extension of the deadline 

provides sufficient time for facilities to fully evaluate 

their needs and only submit genuine BAMM requests based on 

that need. Therefore, EPA has determined that this 
Page 28 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

extension of the deadline for BAMM beyond 2011 is 

appropriate and will only approve BAMM requests that 

fulfill the requirements outlined in the content of request 

section of 40 CFR 98.234(f)(8). 

Comment: Some commenters argued against the removal 

of the term “extreme” from 40 CFR 98.234(f)(8) and 

replacing it with “unique or unusual,” as was proposed, 

stating that this change would result in a wide expansion 

of the number of facilities that would request use of BAMM 

that were unwarranted. In contrast, several commenters 

argued against the inclusion of the terms “unique or 

unusual” and requested that EPA remove the terms from 40 

CFR 98.234(f)(8) altogether. One commenter suggested 

replacing terms like “extreme” and “unique” with “good 

cause” because the complexity of the rule and the breadth 

of its application justify broader discretion in allowing 

BAMM than this text would appear to provide. 

Response: EPA carefully evaluated the introductory 

text in 40 CFR 98.234(f)(8) and in this action has removed 

the term “extreme,” as proposed, in order to more fully 

clarify its intent of the types of circumstances for which 

BAMM could be used beyond 2011. EPA intended that use of 

BAMM post 2011 should only be allowed in limited and 
Page 29 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

exceptional circumstances. As described in the 2010 final 

preamble, inasmuch as approximately fourteen months will 

have passed between signature of the final rule and January 

1, 2012 (75 FR 74471, November 30, 2010). However the 

examples provided, “safety, a requirement being technically 

infeasible, or counter to other local, State or Federal 

regulations” are not “extreme” circumstances. Rather, we 

would consider BAMM for circumstances that were unexpected 

by EPA at the time of drafting the final rule, but which 

might not necessarily be “extreme” in practice. The Miriam 

Webster dictionary defines “extreme” as exceeding the 

ordinary, usual, or expected. Synonyms for extreme are 

“remotest”, “ultimate”, “outermost.” According to the 

Miriam Webster dictionary, the term “unique” can refer to 

distinctively characteristic, with synonyms such as 

individual, particular, and personalized. Unusual refers 

to circumstances that are “rare” or “uncommon.” The point 

of post-2011 BAMM was to target circumstances that are 

unique or unusual and something less than extreme. 

EPA disagrees with the commenters who argued that we 

should remove the terms “unique or unusual”. EPA believes 

that the use of BAMM beyond December 31, 2011 should be 

limited to only unique or unusual circumstances because, as 
Page 30 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

described above, by this time facilities will have had 

adequate time to take the necessary steps to bring their 

facilities into compliance with the rule, save for the few 

site-specific circumstances that are truly unique or 

unusual. 

Comment: One commenter stated that EPA should only 

allow the use of BAMM beyond 2011 in one-year increments. 

The commenter was concerned that the proposed amendments 

relaxed the BAMM provisions and that if EPA were to amend 

the timelines for beyond 2011 BAMM, EPA should only permit 

alternative methods where facilities experience real, 

exigent circumstances. To this extent, they recommended 

that approval for BAMM be expressly time-limited. 

Response: EPA agrees with the commenter that use of 

BAMM beyond December 31, 2011 should be for a limited 

period of time. As described above, EPA intends to approve 

the use of BAMM beyond 2011 only in cases that are unique 

or unusual. EPA agrees with the comments expressed by the 

commenter; a time limit for approving each BAMM ensures 

that the “unique or unusual” criteria continue to be met in 

subsequent years. Limiting approval to one year is 

consistent with the original purpose of BAMM, which was to 

provide a reasonable period of time during the period after 
Page 31 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

subpart W came into effect to allow facilities to 

reasonably come into compliance with the rule. It is also 

important to be aware that EPA always had the right within 

the 2010 final rule to approve BAMM for only one year. 

At the same time, the time limitation on BAMM 

approvals adds minimal burden for facilities requesting 

BAMM. If a facility already has received an approval for a 

BAMM request post-2011, then that the facility successfully 

demonstrated “unique or unusual” circumstances. If those 

same circumstances do not change, for example, the 

monitoring requirements in subpart W continue to lead to 

safety concerns for facility operators, the facility can 

reasonably expect that their future submissions would also 

be approved. It is also possible that EPA could learn from 

the BAMM requests received that a particular rule provision 

results in safety concerns for multiple facilities. In 

these circumstances, EPA may choose to provide an 

additional method(s) to estimate emissions from that 

emissions source in order to avoid the safety issues. Any 

additional methods would only be finalized after notice and 

comment. Approving BAMM for a limited time provides 

sufficient certainty for owners and operators, while 
Page 32 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

ensuring that only those BAMM requests that reflect unique 

or unusual circumstances are approved. 

3. Use of BAMM for Special Circumstances. 

Comment: Several commenters requested that EPA 

include a provision by which owners and operators who 

acquire new operations would be given automatic approval to 

use BAMM for a specified period of time after acquiring the 

new operations. 

Response: EPA generally agrees that some facilities 

that acquire new operations may, for a limited period of 

time, need to use BAMM in order to fully comply with the 

rule. However, EPA does not agree that this would apply to 

all facilities that acquire new operations. Thus, there 

are no specific provisions in this action that would allow 

for owners or operators of facilities acquiring new 

operations to automatically be approved to use BAMM. EPA 

has concluded that the provisions outlined in the 2010 

final rule, as amended by this action, allow facilities 

sufficient flexibility to be apply for the use of BAMM 

should the need arise. 

For example, in some cases, if a facility acquires new 

operations that were already subject to subpart W, there 

would be no need to allow for use of BAMM for any period of 
Page 33 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

time as a result of that acquisition. All operations would 

have been subject to subpart W from the beginning of the 

calendar year. 

If a facility acquires new operations that were not 

previously subject to the GHG Reporting Program, there are 

options within the 2010 final rule that facilities may use 

to meet the requirements of the rule. In some cases, the 

facility will be able to estimate emissions per the 

calculation equations in the rule, and therefore no other 

provisions are required. If the facility cannot estimate 

emissions, the missing data procedures in 40 CFR 98.235 

might be applicable. This approach would be reasonable 

because the data from the acquired operations could be 

considered missing, in that they had not been retained by 

the plant not subject to the rule in the beginning of the 

year. In this case, if the calculations can be undertaken 

in the current reporting year, or in the following year, 

but before the March 31st deadline, then missing data 

procedures might be used. Finally, if none of these 

existing rule options are viable, facilities can request 

BAMM under 40 CFR 98.234(f)(1). Such an example could be 

“unique or unusual” and therefore meet the requirements of 

40 CFR 98.234(f)(1). 
Page 34 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

Comment: Two commenters requested that EPA amend the 

approval criteria for BAMM beyond 2011 to allow the use of 

BAMM until the next scheduled shutdown for circumstances 

where compliance would require shutdown of facilities or 

units that operate continuously. 

Response: EPA agrees that the final rule did not 

intend for owners and operators to have to shut down 

facilities in order to install the necessary equipment and 

we have clarified in this action that the need to shutdown 

to install necessary equipment would be a valid reason for 

BAMM. As described in the preamble to the 2010 final rule, 

“[i]f a reporter requests an extension because equipment 

cannot be installed without a process unit shutdown, EPA is 

likely to approve such a request if the documentation 

clearly demonstrates why it is not feasible to install the 

equipment without a process unit shutdown. . .” EPA also 

noted that “[t]here are many locations where monitors can 

be installed without a process unit shutdown, because there 

is often some redundancy in process or combustion equipment 

or in the piping that conveys fuels, raw materials and 

products. For example, many facilities have multiple 

combustion units and fuel feed lines such that when one 

combustion unit is not operating they can obtain the needed 
Page 35 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

steam, heat, or emissions destruction by using other 

combustion devices. Some facilities have multiple process 

lines that can operate independently, so one line can be 

temporarily shut down to install monitors while the 

facility continues to make the same product in other 

process lines to maintain production goals. If a monitor 

needs to be installed in a section of piping or ductwork, 

it can be possible in some cases to isolate a line without 

shutting down the process unit (depending on the process 

configuration, mode of operation, storage capacity, etc.). 

If the line or equipment location where a monitor needs to 

be installed can be temporarily isolated and the monitor 

can be installed without a full process unit shutdown, it 

is less likely EPA will approve an extension request.” So, 

if owners and operators can sufficiently demonstrate that 

installation of required equipment would require a 

shutdown, that could also be a valid reason for BAMM post 

2011. 

III. Economic Impacts of the Rule 

Under this provision, owners and operators are not 

required to use BAMM. Rather, this provision provides an 

alternative means of compliance in lieu of providing 

specified data input requirements for determining GHG 
Page 36 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

emissions. Consequently, this provision is not expected to 

have a significant effect on the economy and an economic 

impact analysis is not required. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review 

and Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This action is not a "significant regulatory action" 

under the terms of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and is therefore not subject to review 

under Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 

21, 2011). 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

This action does not impose any new information 

collection burden. These amendments affect provisions in 

the rule related to BAMM. The final amendments reduce the 

administrative burden on industry by extending the time 

period by which owners and operators of facilities subject 

to subpart W may use BAMM without having to submit an 

application to EPA for approval to use BAMM in 2011. The 

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has previously 

approved the information collection requirements contained 

in the existing regulations, 40 CFR 98 subpart W (75 FR 
Page 37 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

74458, November 30, 2010), under the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and has 

assigned OMB control number 2060-0651. The OMB control 

numbers for EPA's regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 

CFR part 9. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The RFA generally requires an agency to prepare a 

regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 

notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the 

Administrative Procedure Act or any other statute unless 

the agency certifies that the rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a substantial number of 

small entities. Small entities include small businesses, 

small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions. 

For purposes of assessing the impacts of this proposed 

rule on small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) a 

small business as defined by the Small Business 

Administration’s regulations at 13 CFR 121.201; (2) a small 

governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, 

county, town, school district or special district with a 

population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small 

organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise which is 
Page 38 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its 

field. 

After considering the economic impacts of today’s 

proposed rule on small entities, I certify that this action 

will not have a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. In determining 

whether a rule has a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, the impact of concern 

is any significant adverse economic impact on small 

entities, since the primary purpose of the regulatory 

flexibility analyses is to identify and address regulatory 

alternatives “which minimize any significant economic 

impact of the rule on small entities.” 5 USC 603 and 604. 

Thus, an agency may certify that a rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a substantial number of 

small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, or 

otherwise has a positive economic effect on all of the 

small entities subject to the rule. 

As part of the process for finalization of the subpart 

W rule (75 FR 74458), EPA undertook specific steps to 

evaluate the effect of that final rule on small entities. 

Under that final rule for subpart W (75 FR 74458) EPA 

conducted a screening assessment comparing compliance costs 
Page 39 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

to onshore petroleum and natural gas industry specific 

receipts data for establishments owned by small businesses. 

The results of that screening analysis, as detailed in the 

preamble to the final rule for subpart W (75 FR 74482), 

demonstrated that the cost-to-sales ratios were less than 

one percent for establishments owned by small businesses 

that EPA considered most likely to be covered by the 

reporting program. The results of that analysis can be 

found in the preamble to the final rule (75 FR 74485). 

Based on this final action, owners and operators of 

certain facilities for which BAMM requests have been made 

according to the requirements in 40 CFR 98.234(f), are 

granted additional time to use BAMM during 2011 without 

being required to submit an application for approval to the 

Administrator. In addition, the final amendments in this 

action broaden the types of emission sources that owners 

and operators of affected facilities may use BAMM without 

being required to submit an application for approval from 

the Administrator. Finally, based on the amendments in 

this action, owners and operators who request use of BAMM 

for 2012 and beyond are granted additional time by which 

they would be required to submit their application to the 

Administrator for approval. We have therefore concluded 
Page 40 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

that this action will relieve regulatory burden for all 

affected small entities. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, requires Federal agencies, 

unless otherwise prohibited by law, to assess the effects 

of their regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal 

governments and the private sector. Federal agencies must 

also develop a plan to provide notice to small governments 

that might be significantly or uniquely affected by any 

regulatory requirements. The plan must enable officials of 

affected small governments to have meaningful and timely 

input in the development of EPA regulatory proposals with 

significant Federal intergovernmental mandates and must 

inform, educate, and advise small governments on compliance 

with the regulatory requirements. 

The final rule amendments do not contain a Federal 

mandate that may result in expenditures of $100 million or 

more for State, local, and tribal governments, in the 

aggregate, or the private sector in any one year. Thus, 

the final rule amendments are not subject to the 

requirements of section 202 and 205 of the UMRA. This rule 

is also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of 
Page 41 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that 

might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

This action does not have federalism implications. It 

will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on 

the relationship between the national government and the 

States, or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various levels of government, as 

specified in Executive Order 13132. 

These amendments apply to an optional provision in the 

final rule for subpart W, which applies to petroleum and 

natural gas facilities that emit greenhouse gases. Few, if 

any, State or local government facilities would be 

affected. This regulation also does not limit the power of 

States or localities to collect GHG data and/or regulate 

GHG emissions. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not apply 

to this action. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination 

with Indian Tribal Governments

This action does not have tribal implications, as 

specified in Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 

9, 2000). The fine rule amendments in this action do not 

result in any changes to the current requirements of 40 CFR 
Page 42 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

part 98, subpart W. The amendments proposed in this rule 

only apply to optional provisions in 40 CFR part 98 subpart 

W. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this 

action. 

Although Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this 

action, EPA sought opportunities to provide information to 

Tribal governments and representatives during the 

development of the rule for subpart W promulgated on 

November 30, 2010. A summary of the EPA’s consultations 

with Tribal officials is provided in Sections VIII.D and 

VIII.F of the preamble to the 2009 final rule and Section 

IV.F of the preamble to the 2010 final rule for subpart W 

(75 FR 74485). 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks

EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997) as applying only to those regulatory 

actions that concern health or safety risks, such that the 

analysis required under section 5-501 of the Executive 

Order has the potential to influence the regulation. This 

action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it 

does not establish an environmental standard intended to 

mitigate health or safety risks. 
Page 43 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions that Significantly 

Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211 

(66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because it is not a 

significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (“NTTAA”), Public Law No. 104-113, 

12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary 

consensus standards in its regulatory activities unless to 

do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or 

otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., materials specifications, test 

methods, sampling procedures, and business practices) that 

are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards 

bodies. NTTAA directs EPA to provide Congress, through 

OMB, explanations when the Agency decides not to use 

available and applicable voluntary consensus standards. 

This action does not involve technical standards. 

Therefore, EPA did not consider the use of any voluntary 

consensus standards. 
Page 44 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and LowIncome Populations

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994) 

establishes Federal executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs Federal agencies, to 

the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their mission by 

identifying and addressing, as appropriate, 

disproportionately high and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, policies, and 

activities on minority populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

EPA has determined that this final rule will not have 

disproportionately high and adverse human health or 

environmental effects on minority or low-income populations 

because it does not affect the level of protection provided 

to human health or the environment because it is a rule 

addressing information collection and reporting procedures. 

K. Congressional Review Act

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as 

added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness 

Act of 1996 (SBREFA), generally provides that before a rule 
Page 45 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to 

each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing 

this rule and other required information to the U.S. 

Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the 

Comptroller General of the U.S. A major rule cannot take 

effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 

Register. This action is not a “major rule” as defined by 

5 U.S.C. 804(2). This rule will be effective on September 

30, 2011. 
Page 44 of 51 

Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases: Petroleum and 

Natural Gas Systems: Revisions to Best Available Monitoring 

Method Provisions 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 98

Environmental Protection, Administrative practice and 

procedures, Greenhouse gases, Air pollution control, 

Monitoring, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 

DATE:______________________________ 

___________________________________ 

Lisa P. Jackson, 

Administrator. 
Page 47 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

For the reasons discussed in the preamble, EPA 

proposes to amend 40 CFR part 98 as follows: 

PART 98 [AMENDED] 

1. The authority citation for part 98 continues to 

read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q. 

Subpart W [Amended] 

2. Section 98.234 is amended as follows: 

a. By revising paragraph (f)(1) introductory text. 

b. By revising paragraph (f)(2) introductory text. 

c. By revising paragraph (f)(3) introductory text. 

d. By revising paragraph (f)(4) introductory text. 

e. By revising paragraph (f)(5). 

f. By removing and reserving paragraph (f)(6). 

g. By removing and reserving paragraph (f)(7). 

h. By revising paragraph (f)(8). 

§98.234 Monitoring and QA/QC Requirements 

* * * * * 

(f) * * * 

(1) * * * EPA reserves the right to review 

best available monitoring method requests submitted after 

the deadlines specified in this section, and will consider 

requests which demonstrate unique or unusual circumstances 
Page 48 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

unforeseen at the time of the applicable best available 

monitoring method deadline. * * * 

* * * * * 

(2) Best available monitoring methods for wellrelated emissions. During January 1, 2011 through December 

31, 2011, owners and operators may use best available 

monitoring methods for any well-related data that cannot 

reasonably be measured according to the monitoring and 

QA/QC requirements of this subpart. These well-related 

sources are: 

* * * * * 

(3) Best available monitoring methods for specified 

activity data. During January 1, 2011 through December 31, 

2011, owners or operators may use best available monitoring 

methods for activity data as listed below that cannot 

reasonably be obtained according to the monitoring and 

QA/QC requirements of this subpart. These sources are: 

* * * * * 

(4) Best available monitoring methods for leak 

detection and measurement. During January 1, 2011 through 

December 31, 2011, owners or operators may use best 

available monitoring methods for sources requiring leak 

detection and/or measurement that cannot reasonably be 
Page 49 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

obtained according to the monitoring and QA/QC requirements 

of this part. These sources include: 

* * * * * 

(5) Requests for the use of best available monitoring 

methods.

(i) No request or approval by the Administrator is 

necessary to use best available monitoring methods between 

January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2011 for the sources 

specified in paragraph (f)(2) of this section. 

(ii) No request or approval by the Administrator is 

necessary to use best available monitoring methods between 

January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2011 for sources specified 

in paragraph (f)(3) of this section. 

(iii) No request or approval by the Administrator is 

necessary to use best available monitoring methods between 

January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2011 for sources specified 

in paragraph (f)(4) of this section. 

(iv) No request or approval by the Administrator is 

necessary to use best available monitoring methods for data 

that cannot reasonably be obtained between January 1, 2011 

and December 31, 2011 for sources not listed in paragraph 

(f)(2), (f)(3), and (f)(4) of this section. 

(6) [Reserved] 
Page 50 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

(7) [Reserved] 

(8) Requests for extension of the use of best 

available monitoring methods beyond 2011 for sources listed 

in paragraphs (f)(2), (f)(3), (f)(4), and (f)(5)(iv) of 

this section. 

(i) Timing of Request. EPA does not anticipate a 

need for best available monitoring methods beyond 2011, but 

for all reporting years after 2011, best available 

monitoring methods will be considered for unique or unusual 

circumstances which include data collection methods that do 

not meet safety regulations, technical infeasibility, or 

counter to other local, State, or Federal regulations. For 

use of best available monitoring methods in 2012, an 

initial notice of intent to request best available 

monitoring methods must be submitted by December 31, 2011. 

Any notice of intent submitted prior to the effective date 

of this rule cannot be used to meet this December 31, 2011 

deadline; a new notice of intent must be signed and 

submitted by the designated representative. In addition to 

the initial notification of intent, owners or operators 

must also submit an extension request containing the 

information specified in 98.234(f)(8)(ii) by March 30, 

2012. Any best available monitoring methods request 
Page 51 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

submitted prior to the effective date of this rule cannot 

be used to meet the March 30, 2012 deadline; a new best 

available monitoring methods request must be signed and 

submitted by the designated representative. Owners or 

operators that submit both a timely notice of intent and 

extension request consistent with 98.234(f)(8)(ii) can 

automatically use BAMM through June 30, 2012, for the 

specific parameters identified in their notification of 

intent and best available monitoring methods request 

regardless of whether the best available monitoring methods 

request is ultimately approved. Owners or operators that 

submit a notice of intent but do not follow up with a best 

available monitoring methods request by March 30, 2012 

cannot use best available monitoring methods in 2012. For 

2012, when an owner or operator has submitted a notice of 

intent and a subsequent best available monitoring method 

extension request, use of best available monitoring methods 

will be valid, upon approval by the Administrator, until 

the date indicated in the approval or until December 31, 

2012, whichever is earlier. For reporting years after 2012 

a new request to use best available monitoring methods must 

be submitted by September 30th of the year prior to the 
Page 52 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

reporting year for which use of best available monitoring 

methods is sought. 

(ii) Content of request. Requests must contain the 

following information: 

(A) A list of specific source categories and 

parameters for which the owner or operator is seeking use 

of best available monitoring methods. 

(B) For each specific source for which an owner or 

operator is requesting use of best available monitoring 

methods, a description of the unique or unusual 

circumstances, such as data collection methods that do not 

meet safety regulations, technical infeasibility, or 

specific laws or regulations that are counter to data 

collection methods that conflict with each specific source. 

(C) A detailed explanation and supporting 

documentation of how and when the owner or operator will 

comply with all of the subpart W reporting requirements for 

which use of best available monitoring methods are sought. 

(iii) Approval criteria. To obtain approval to use 

best available monitoring methods after December 31, 2011, 

the owner or operator must submit a request demonstrating 

to the Administrator’s satisfaction that the owner or 

operator faces unique or unusual circumstances which 
Page 53 of 53 

This document is a prepublication version, signed by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on 

September 15, 2011. We have taken steps to ensure the accuracy of this version, but it is not the 

official version.

include, by way of example and not in limitation, clearly 

demonstrated data collection methods that do not meet 

safety regulations, technical infeasibility, or counter to 

other local, State, or Federal regulations, along with the 

reasons the owner or operator cannot otherwise address the 

unique or unusual circumstances as required to be 

demonstrated in this paragraph.