Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 59533 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–24371 Filed 9–26–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 98 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2011–0417; FRL–9469–4] 

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 

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 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 Web site 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 Web site at http:// 

www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/ 

ghgrulemaking.html. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Regulated 

Entities. The Administrator determined 

that this action is subject to the 

provisions of Clean Air Act (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 

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 

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 


wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES
59534 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

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 

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 November 28, 2011. 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 

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. 

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 

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 Low-Income 

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. 

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 operators of facilities could 

use BAMM during 2011 without 

submitting a request to the 


wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 59535 

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 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 

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 

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 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 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. 


wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES
59536 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

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 

• 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 

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 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 

1,900 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 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 sourcespecific data in the national GHG 

inventory is germane to the comments 

raised. The national 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 facilitylevel 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 


wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 59537 

1EPA/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. 

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 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 sixmonth extension of the date for 

requesting BAMM for 2012. The twophase 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. 

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 

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 1,900 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 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 

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, 


wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES
59538 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

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 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 timelimited. 

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 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 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 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). 

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 steam, heat, or 

emissions destruction by using other 

combustion devices. Some facilities 

have multiple process lines that can 

operate independently, so one line can 


wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 59539 

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 

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 part 98 subpart W (75 FR 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-forprofit enterprise which is 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 U.S.C. 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 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 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 UMRA because it contains no 

regulatory requirements that might 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. 


wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES
59540 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

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 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. 

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. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income 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 

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. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 98 

Environmental Protection, 

Administrative practice and procedures, 

Greenhouse gases, Air pollution control, 

Monitoring, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

Dated: September 16, 2011. 

Lisa P. Jackson, 

Administrator. 

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) Best available monitoring 

methods. EPA will allow owners or 

operators to use best available 

monitoring methods for parameters in 

§ 98.233 Calculating GHG Emissions as 

specified in paragraphs (f)(2), (f)(3), and 

(f)(4) of this section. If the reporter 

anticipates the potential need for best 

available monitoring for sources for 


wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 187 / Tuesday, September 27, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 59541 

which they need to petition EPA and 

the situation is unresolved at the time 

of the deadline, reporters should submit 

written notice of this potential situation 

to EPA by the specified deadline for 

requests to be considered. 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 unforeseen at the time of 

the applicable best available monitoring 

method deadline. The Administrator 

reserves the right to request further 

information in regard to all petition 

requests. The owner or operator must 

use the calculation methodologies and 

equations in § 98.233 Calculating GHG 

Emissions. Best available monitoring 

methods means any of the following 

methods specified in paragraph (f)(1) of 

this section: 

* * * * * 

(2) Best available monitoring methods 

for well-related 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 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] 

(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 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 

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 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. 

[FR Doc. 2011–24362 Filed 9–26–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


wreier-aviles on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES