[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 32 (Wednesday, February 16, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8808-8811]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03205]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY

[CEQ-2022-0001]


Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Sequestration Guidance

AGENCY: Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ).

ACTION: Notice of availability; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Consistent with the Utilizing Significant Emissions with 
Innovative Technologies (USE IT) Act, the Council on Environmental 
Quality (CEQ) is announcing the availability of and seeking comment on 
an interim guidance document, ``Carbon Capture, Utilization, and 
Sequestration Guidance,'' to assist Federal agencies with the 
regulation and permitting of CCUS activities in the United States.

DATES: CEQ must receive comments by March 18, 2022.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by docket number CEQ-
2022-0001, by any of the following methods:
    <bullet> Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. 
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
    <bullet> Fax: (202) 456-6546.
    <bullet> Mail: Council on Environmental Quality, 730 Jackson Place 
NW, Washington, DC 20503.
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the agency 
name, ``Council on Environmental Quality,'' and docket number, CEQ-
2022-0001. All comments received will be posted without change to 
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information 
provided. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to 
be private, Confidential Business Information (CBI), or other 
information, the disclosure of which is restricted by statute.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or 
comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy B. Coyle, Deputy General Counsel, 
730 Jackson Place NW, Washington, DC 20503, (202) 395-5750 or 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#d899b5a1f69af69bb7a1b4bd98bbbda9f6bdb7a8f6bfb7ae"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="6c2d0115422e422f031500092c0f091d4209031c420b031a">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to the Utilizing Significant 
Emissions with Innovative Technologies (USE IT) Act, Public Law 116-
260, div. S, 102, 134 Stat. 1182, 2243 (2020), the Council on 
Environmental Quality (CEQ) is issuing this guidance for Federal 
agencies on the facilitation of reviews associated with the deployment 
of carbon capture, utilization, and sequestration (CCUS) projects and 
carbon dioxide pipelines, and to support the efficient, orderly, and 
responsible deployment of CCUS projects and carbon dioxide pipelines, 
where appropriate. This guidance is consistent with CEQ's report, 
``Council on Environmental Quality Report to Congress on Carbon 
Capture, Utilization, and Sequestration'' (CEQ CCUS Report or Report) 
issued in June 2021.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ CEQ CCUS Report (June 2021), https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/CEQ-CCUS-Permitting-Report.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Context

    The CEQ CCUS Report \2\ recognized that to reach the President's 
ambitious climate goal of net-zero emissions economy-wide by 2050, the 
United States will likely have to capture, transport, and permanently 
sequester significant quantities of carbon dioxide. There is growing 
scientific consensus

[[Page 8809]]

that, while the first priority for addressing climate change must be to 
avoid emissions, CCUS technologies and permanent sequestration are 
likely needed to prevent the worst impacts of climate change. CCUS 
deployment can and should reduce emissions of other kinds of pollution 
in addition to carbon pollution, protect communities from increases in 
cumulative pollution, and maintain and create good, union-friendly jobs 
across the country.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See, e.g., CEQ CCUS Report, ``Executive Summary'' (June 
2021), https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/CEQ-CCUS-Permitting-Report.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CCUS refers to a set of technologies that remove carbon dioxide 
from the emissions of point sources or the atmosphere, and either 
transport it, compress it, and inject it deep in the earth's crust (and 
monitor sites to verify safe and secure storage operations), or 
transform it for use in industrial processes or as feedstock for useful 
commercial products. Technical and economic feasibility of carbon 
capture at significant rates has been established in the literature.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See, e.g., Alexander Zoelle, et al., ``Bituminous Coal and 
Natural Gas to Electricity: >90% Capture Cases Technical Note,'' 
DOE/NETL-2022/3222 (Dec. 2021); https://www.netl.doe.gov/projects/files/BituminousCoalandNaturalGastoElectricity_TechnicalNote_Final_123021.pdf; Y. Du, et al., ``Zero- and negative-emissions fossil-fired power 
plants using CO<INF>2</INF> capture by conventional aqueous 
amines+,'' Int'l Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control (Oct. 2021), 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2021.103473; Patrick Brandl, et al., 
``Beyond 90% capture: Possible, but at what cost?,'' Int'l Journal 
of Greenhouse Gas Control (Feb. 2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2020.103239.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In many cases, the carbon dioxide must be transported, usually by 
pipeline, for permanent and verifiable sequestration. There are 
important differences between point-source carbon capture and carbon 
dioxide removal from the ambient air (CDR). However, per Congressional 
direction, and, for the purposes of this guidance, CCUS includes 
approaches such as direct air capture (DAC), which captures carbon 
dioxide from the ambient air, and bioenergy with carbon capture and 
sequestration (BECCS) techniques, where transportation and permanent 
and verifiable sequestration is required to meet climate goals. The 
Administration recognizes the imperative for CCUS actions to be 
considered in a timely manner and in the context of a strong regulatory 
regime that includes early consultation with Tribal Nations and 
meaningful engagement with communities, stakeholders, and other 
sovereigns.
    To advance these aims, the President is committed to increasing 
support for CCUS research, development, demonstration, and deployment 
(RDD&D), enhancing the Section 45Q tax incentive for CCUS (Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (``Section 45Q'')), appropriately 
implementing the robust and effective regulatory regime that exists in 
the United States, and ensuring that CCUS technologies are informed by 
community perspectives and are consistent with the Administration's 
climate, public health, and economic goals.
    To reach the President's ambitious domestic climate goal of net-
zero emissions economy-wide by 2050, the United States will likely have 
to capture, transport, and permanently sequester significant quantities 
of carbon dioxide. As explained in more detail below, deploying CCUS 
technologies will require agencies to manage and complete sound, 
effective, and efficient environmental analyses under a variety of 
statutes, while also ensuring that CCUS systems deliver desired 
societal outcomes with broad and deep public support. These outcomes 
should generate societal net benefits, including emissions reductions. 
In short, the successful widespread deployment of responsible CCUS will 
require strong and effective permitting, efficient regulatory regimes, 
meaningful public engagement early in the review and deployment 
process, and measures to safeguard public health and the environment. 
Agencies have already taken actions in the past decade to develop a 
robust CCUS regulatory framework to protect the environment and public 
health across multiple statutes. This framework requires monitoring and 
compliance with a variety of reporting requirements. This guidance is 
intended to address opportunities for clarifications and improvements 
to ensure that CCUS is responsibly scaled in a timely manner, while 
maintaining the integrity of public health, the environment, and the 
economy.

Guidance

    CEQ issues the following guidance to facilitate reviews associated 
with the deployment of CCUS and to promote the efficient, orderly, and 
responsible development and permitting of CCUS projects at an increased 
scale in line with the Administration's climate, economic, and public 
health goals.

1. Facilitating Federal Decision Making on CCUS Projects and Carbon 
Dioxide Pipelines

    The process for permitting a CCUS project is similar to that for 
any industrial activity, and the CEQ CCUS Report \4\ recognized that 
the Federal Government has an existing regulatory framework that is 
capable of safeguarding the environment, public health, and public 
safety as CCUS projects move forward. The Report also provided an 
inventory of Federal permits and reviews that are potentially relevant 
to any CCUS project.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ See, e.g., CEQ CCUS Report, ``Key Findings,'' ``Section 
5.1,'' and ``Appendix A'' (June 2021), https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/CEQ-CCUS-Permitting-Report.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Likewise, the Report identified a number of areas where CEQ could 
work with agencies to continue to facilitate efficient, orderly, and 
responsible deployment of CCUS. For example, federally funded CCUS 
projects or CCUS activities on federally managed lands may trigger 
obligations under a variety of statutes including the National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); the National Historic Preservation 
Act; the Clean Water Act; the Clean Air Act; the Safe Drinking Water 
Act; the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act; the Outer 
Continental Shelf Lands Act; the Endangered Species Act (ESA); the 
Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act; the Bald 
and Golden Eagle Protection Act; the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act; 
the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899; the Federal Land Policy and 
Management Act; and the Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety Act. Other 
safety, environmental, and ecological requirements may also apply.
    To facilitate the deployment of CCUS in the United States, in line 
with the Administration's climate and economic goals, agencies should 
consider developing programmatic environmental reviews,\5\ such as 
tiered documents or programmatic environmental impact statements 
(PEISs) under NEPA, or programmatic biological opinions under the ESA, 
where such analyses can facilitate more efficient and effective 
environmental reviews of multiple projects while maintaining strong 
community engagement.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See, e.g., Effective Use of Programmatic NEPA Reviews (Dec. 
18, 2014), https://ceq.doe.gov/docs/ceq-regulations-and-guidance/Effective_Use_of_Programmatic_NEPA_Reviews_Final_Dec2014_searchable.pdf.
    \6\ See, e.g., 40 CFR 1501.11; 43 CFR 46.140.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For example, a PEIS could be prepared for a region where agencies 
anticipate review of multiple CCUS projects. In 2012, the Department of 
Energy (DOE) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) completed a PEIS that 
evaluated actions that would facilitate utility-scale solar energy 
development on public lands in six

[[Page 8810]]

southwestern states.\7\ That same year, BLM also worked with the U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service to complete a programmatic consultation under 
the ESA addressing the solar energy program's potential effects on 
listed species.\8\ Agencies could apply a similar approach in the CCUS 
context, preparing programmatic analyses assessing impacts associated 
with the deployment of CCUS, such as to help identify appropriate areas 
for CCUS project deployment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See DOE and BLM, ``Solar Energy Development Programmatic 
Environmental Impact Statement'' (July 2012), https://solareis.anl.gov/documents/fpeis/index.cfm.
    \8\ See Bureau of Land Management Solar Energy Program, 
``Endangered Species Act Section 7 Compliance'' (August 2013), 
https://blmsolar.anl.gov/program/laws/esa/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As always, agencies conducting NEPA analyses regarding proposed 
CCUS actions must analyze all reasonably foreseeable direct, indirect, 
and cumulative effects, including cumulative pollution from numerous 
sources. Agencies should work with communities and Tribes during the 
scoping phase to identify alternatives to the proposed action, 
including alternatives that reduce environmental impacts, especially on 
overburdened and underserved communities.
    The USE IT Act established CCUS as a sector under Title 41 of the 
Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST-41) Act. However, the 
Federal Permitting Infrastructure Permitting Council has not received 
any CCUS project applications for FAST-41 coverage as of the issuance 
of this guidance; therefore, agencies have not had the opportunity to 
develop a comprehensive permitting timetable for any CCUS project. CEQ 
recommends that the Permitting Council Executive Director, in 
consultation with the Permitting Council member agencies, establish an 
appropriate facilitating agency for each general CCUS project category. 
CEQ also recommends that the Permitting Council Executive Director, in 
consultation with the Permitting Council member agencies, develop for 
each category of CCUS project recommended performance schedules. 
Identification of the environmental reviews and authorizations most 
commonly required will help facilitate timely reviews of such projects. 
Separately, agencies may also consider implementing memoranda of 
understanding to establish the process by which they will collaborate 
on anticipated CCUS projects and related activities.
    Carbon dioxide pipelines and permanent sequestration are critical 
to the future nationwide deployment of CCUS. Extensive analysis 
identifies the priority pathways and necessary pipeline infrastructure 
required to achieve CCUS and permanent sequestration at a climate-
relevant scale across all industries, but significant investments, 
planning, and community engagement and analysis are required. An 
expanded carbon dioxide pipeline and sequestration network in the 
United States should be accompanied by close monitoring and enforcement 
of existing regulations and development of new tools to monitor and 
improve safety while also reducing the number of incidents that result 
in leakage of carbon dioxide.
    To facilitate effective permanent sequestration, the Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act (the IIJA) provides additional funding for 
implementation of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Class VI 
Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program, including funds that could 
enable increased staff capacity and training at agencies with 
geological sequestration permitting authorities, and providing grants 
for States with UIC Class VI primary enforcement authority (primacy) or 
to States seeking primacy. The IIJA also expands the Carbon Storage 
Validation and Testing Demonstration Program at DOE to include a large-
scale carbon storage commercialization program to demonstrate the 
feasibility, site characterization, permitting and construction stages 
of permanent, commercial-scale geologic sequestration projects. In 
addition, the IIJA amended the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to 
authorize the Secretary of the Interior to grant leases, easements, and 
rights-of-way to support CCUS activities on the outer continental shelf 
(OCS). It also required the Department of the Interior (DOI) to 
promulgate related regulations within a year. CEQ will collaborate with 
agencies and monitor progress related to these activities and 
regulations in the coming months, including authorizing use of geologic 
pore space on Federal lands.
    To build public confidence and increase transparency in geologic 
carbon sequestration activities, CEQ further recommends that agencies 
responsible for greenhouse gas inventories and related reporting, such 
as EPA, include provisions that increase transparency regarding CCUS 
activities in the United States. For example, the EPA could consider 
enhancing reporting for CCUS and carbon capture and utilization (CCU) 
in proposed rule revisions to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program.
    Transparently and reliably quantifying the amount of carbon dioxide 
permanently sequestered also requires monitoring and verification, 
which is required as part of the EPA's UIC Class VI permitting and 
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program requirements for geologic 
sequestration of carbon dioxide. For additional transparency regarding 
geologic sequestration activities in the United States, agencies such 
as DOI, DOE, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 
(NOAA) should consider expanding existing efforts, and (when feasible) 
implementing a national program for monitoring deep geologic carbon 
sequestration.
    On pipelines, the IIJA establishes the Carbon Dioxide 
Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Program to provide 
flexible Federal loans and grants for building carbon dioxide pipelines 
designed with excess capacity. Because multiple Federal and State 
agencies will be responsible for planning and permitting priority 
pipeline pathways, and in order to ensure that these actions are 
aligned with climate, economic, and public health objectives, CEQ will 
convene the relevant agencies to assess opportunities for improvement 
in carbon dioxide pipeline permitting.
    CEQ also recommends that the agencies with oversight authority for 
carbon dioxide pipelines update regulations, as appropriate, to address 
the deployment of CCUS technologies. For example, the impacts of 
climate change should be planned for and addressed in the design, 
construction, and maintenance of carbon dioxide pipelines. Agencies 
with regulatory authority, such as the Department of Transportation's 
(DOT) Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, should 
consider updating criteria for geohazard risk evaluation and emergency 
planning and enforce the application of those criteria to carbon 
dioxide and other pipeline operations in the United States. In 
addition, agencies should provide updated training for first responders 
regarding potential carbon dioxide pipeline incidents. Agencies should 
also consider developing and applying protocols for safety monitoring 
and enforcement that also consider the company's capacity to respond to 
an incident should one occur, evaluating financial risk.

2. Public Engagement and Interdisciplinary Research

    The scale of implementation of CCUS likely to be required to 
achieve climate goals understandably raises concerns

[[Page 8811]]

about public health and environmental impacts, as well as questions 
about who stands to benefit from the deployment of these systems. 
Responsible CCUS projects should engage communities and Tribes in co-
development of projects and approaches; protect communities from 
pollution; and incorporate environmental justice and equity 
considerations, especially in communities that are already exposed to 
multiple pollution sources.
    CEQ recommends that agencies undertake measures to facilitate a 
transparent process and meaningful public engagement. In addition to 
developing robust Tribal consultation and stakeholder engagement plans 
and conducting regular engagement, agencies should prioritize the 
development and application of environmental justice best practices for 
CCUS efforts.\9\ Actions that should be taken include:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See, e.g., E.O. 12898, Federal Actions to Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations (Feb. 11, 1994); Environmental Justice: Guidance Under 
the National Environmental Policy Act (Dec. 10, 1997), https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-02/documents/ej_guidance_nepa_ceq1297.pdf; Promising Practices for EJ 
Methodologies in NEPA Reviews (Mar. 2016), https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016-08/documents/nepa_promising_practices_document_2016.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    <bullet> Evaluating the impacts of proposed CCUS actions on 
potential host communities early in the planning process;
    <bullet> Providing information about the impacts, costs and 
benefits of CCUS in advance of Tribal consultation and stakeholder 
engagement;
    <bullet> Consulting Tribal Nations on potential CCUS projects in a 
manner that strengthens Nation-to-Nation relationships;
    <bullet> Avoiding the imposition of additional burdens on 
overburdened and underserved communities, including by evaluating 
direct, indirect, and cumulative effects and identifying and 
implementing appropriate mitigation and avoidance measures; and
    <bullet> Ensuring transparent decisions and accountability to 
Tribes and communities with respect to any applicable mitigation 
measures designed to reduce environmental impacts.
    When feasible, CEQ further recommends that agencies with 
substantial CCUS technology development and deployment activities 
initiate interdisciplinary RDD&D programs and robust community 
engagement in the context of CCUS technology deployment. This can help 
to ensure that RDD&D on CCUS is informed by diverse academic 
perspectives and aligned with community objectives and goals. These 
agencies include DOE, EPA, DOT, and the National Science Foundation. 
The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy should 
coordinate this interdisciplinary research.

3. Understanding Environmental Impacts

    The CEQ CCUS Report also highlighted the need to further assess and 
quantify potential impacts on local criteria air pollutants and other 
emissions resulting from carbon capture retrofits at industrial 
facilities in response to concerns regarding potential cumulative 
emissions from single and/or multiple sources.\10\ In addition to 
assessing criteria pollutants associated with CCUS activities, agencies 
should also assess carbon dioxide emissions from project 
infrastructure. OCS sequestration projects should further consider 
possible impacts on water column carbonate chemistry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See, e.g., CEQ CCUS Report at 40 (June 2021), https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/CEQ-CCUS-Permitting-Report.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CEQ recommends that agencies, including EPA and DOE, collaborate on 
studies regarding the effect of carbon capture deployment on air 
quality in the United States. Such studies will be coordinated by CEQ, 
and may include evaluating use of air dispersion modeling as part of 
comprehensive air quality impacts analysis and will be used to develop 
additional guidance for considering air quality impacts as part of the 
planning and permitting process for CCUS activities. CEQ also 
recommends that agencies, including DOE, EPA, DOI, and NOAA, 
collaborate on additional studies that are needed to better monitor and 
verify CCUS results and understand the impacts to living marine 
resources associated with geologic sequestration and monitoring efforts 
on the OCS.
    In addition, CEQ recommends that agencies share best practices with 
respect to data collection and reporting on CCUS projects. For example, 
DOE now requires recipients of funding to collect and report data 
regarding the non-carbon dioxide air emissions associated with carbon 
capture projects.

4. Carbon Capture and Utilization and Carbon Dioxide Removal

    Each technical approach for CCU and CDR differs in technical 
maturity, market potential, cost, and carbon dioxide reduction 
potential. Each may also have different societal and environmental 
impacts and benefits. Enabling commercialization of CCU and CDR will 
ultimately require increased transparency to build public confidence in 
the emissions reductions associated with these projects and their 
durability. Such transparency can be accomplished through publicly 
available analyses, such as life-cycle analyses, and/or the 
establishment of standards or certification for products. 
Commercialization of CCU and CDR can be further expedited through 
Federal procurement and other economic incentives. The IIJA supports 
engineered carbon removal, including by creating regional DAC hubs.
    Agencies with activities and responsibilities for CCU and CDR 
regulations, standards, and greenhouse gas reporting, such as EPA, DOE, 
the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and other relevant 
agencies, should consider consolidating and publishing a repository for 
life-cycle analysis (LCA) methodology, results, and information related 
to CCU and CDR, building on existing collaboration through the Federal 
LCA Commons. As DOE further develops standards and certifications 
needed to facilitate the commercialization of CCU technologies as 
required in the IIJA, CEQ recommends that DOE and other agencies with 
equities in CCUS standards consider evaluating how standards and 
certifications can increase Federal procurement of CCU, CCUS, and CDR 
technologies.

Brenda Mallory,
Chair.
[FR Doc. 2022-03205 Filed 2-15-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3325-F2-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>