nonattainment area are two areas that have experienced ozone issues
like those in the Uinta Basin where oil and natural gas activities have
contributed to ozone nonattainment and have been addressed through
state and local rules that apply to the same emission units covered by
this proposed rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \85\ ``Oil and Gas Production Facilities, Chapter 6, Section 2
Permitting Guidance,'' WDEQ (available at http://deq.wyoming.gov/aqd/new-source-review/resources/guidance-documents, accessed August
19, 2019); Wyoming Nonattainment Area Regulations, Chapter 8,
section 6; 020-020-008 Wyo. Code R. Sec.  6 (2016).
    \86\ Statewide Controls for Oil and Gas Operations and Natural
Gas-Fired Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines, 5 Code Colo.
Regs. Sec.  1001-9 (2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In reviewing these other state regulations, we considered whether
the technologies are being commonly used and required at oil and
natural gas sources in other states, so as to ensure that this proposed
U&O FIP requirements are legally and practicably enforceable, as well
as reasonably achievable. Based on this review, we developed
requirements in this proposed U&O FIP reflecting the most relevant
aspects of Utah-implemented rules and permit requirements applicable to
new, modified and existing oil and natural gas sources in the Uinta
Basin. However, the proposed rule's requirements are also like
Colorado's and Wyoming's requirements for crude oil, condensate, and
produced water storage tanks; glycol dehydrators; pneumatic pumps;
closed-vent systems; enclosed combustors and utility flares; pneumatic
controllers; tank truck loading and unloading; and fugitive emissions
detection and repair.
    In summary, a primary objective of this proposed U&O FIP is to
protect air quality on the U&O Reservation. We are seeking to do so in
a manner that achieves the same or consistent proposed requirements
with the UDEQ's requirements for new, modified and existing sources,
including for certain equipment or activities that the EPA does not
regulate under its standards but which the UDEQ does regulate at
existing sources. These are equipment and activities that we have
identified as significant sources of VOC emissions on the U&O
Reservation. For those equipment or activities, we are proposing
requirements for existing sources that are the same as or consistent
with the UDEQ's established requirements for existing sources. In
addition, as needed, we have consulted the EPA's standards for new and
modified oil and natural gas sources, where we are proposing to
regulate the same equipment at existing sources that is regulated
nationally at new and modified sources. Overall, this approach, for
many requirements in this proposed U&O FIP, meets our goal of
regulatory consistency across the Uinta Basin. In addition, we must
follow the minimum criteria in 40 CFR part 51, the CAA, and the TAR for
approval of rules in either a SIP or a TIP,\87\ which include adequate
monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements to ensure the
requirements are federally enforceable as a practical matter. The RIA
for this proposal contains a detailed comparison of the proposed rule
requirements to the relevant state requirements reviewed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \87\ EPA has used the planning requirements applicable to states
as a guide in developing this proposed U&O FIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Included in the docket for this rulemaking are copies of the UDEQ
rules and other state and federal rules that we considered in this
process, as well as an RIA containing a discussion comparing the
requirements of those rules to the requirements in this proposed U&O
FIP.
5. Consideration of Non-CAA Oil and Natural Gas Requirements
    During development of this proposed U&O FIP requirements, we were
mindful that some oil and natural gas sources that will be subject to
the requirements of this proposed U&O FIP, if finalized as proposed,
may also be subject to requirements of the Department of Interior's
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) recent rule covering production of oil
and natural gas on federal and Indian lands.\88\ The final rule,
hereinafter referred to as the ``2018 BLM Venting and Flaring Rule,''
revised a 2016 rule,\89\ hereinafter referred to as the ``2016 BLM
Venting and Flaring Rule,'' in a manner that reduced compliance
burdens, reinstated interpretations of existing statutory authorities,
and re-established longstanding requirements that had been replaced by
the 2016 BLM Venting and Flaring Rule. We have reviewed the 2018 BLM
Venting and Flaring Rule \90\ and considered potentially overlapping
requirements in development of this proposed U&O FIP. The final 2018
BLM Venting and Flaring Rule contains a general requirement that
operators flare, rather than vent, gas that is not captured, requires
persons conducting manual well purging to remain onsite in order to end
the venting event as soon as practical, and clarifies what does and
does not constitute an emergency for the purposes of royalty
assessment. The 2018 BLM Venting and Flaring Rule removed in their
entirety the following requirements from the 2016 BLM Venting and
Flaring Rule: Waste minimization plans; well drilling and completion
requirements; pneumatic controller and diaphragm pump requirements;
storage vessel requirements; and LDAR requirements. The 2018 BLM
Venting and Flaring Rule modified and/or replaced the following
requirements from the 2016 BLM Venting and Flaring Rule: Gas-capture
requirement--the BLM now defers to State or Tribal regulations in
determining when the flaring of associated gas from oil wells will be
royalty-free; downhole well maintenance and liquids unloading
requirements; and measuring and reporting volumes of gas vented and
flared.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \88\ See 83 FR 49184 (September 28, 2018). Department of the
Interior, BLM, Final Rule, ``Waste Prevention, Production Subject to
Royalties, and Resource Conservation; Rescission or Revision of
Certain Requirements,'' (hereinafter ``2018 BLM Venting and Flaring
Rule'').
    \89\ See 81 FR 83008 (November 18, 2016). Department of the
Interior, BLM, Final Rule, ``Waste Prevention, Production Subject to
Royalties, and Resource Conservation'' (hereinafter, ``2016 BLM
Venting and Flaring Rule'').
    \90\ The RIA contains additional details on our review of BLM's
rules and is available in the docket for this rule (Docket ID No.
EPA-R08-OAR-2015-0709).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since the 2018 BLM Venting and Flaring Rule removed requirements on
existing activities and equipment, such as storage tanks, pneumatic
pumps, pneumatic controllers, and LDAR, we do not expect the proposed
FIP will overlap with the BLM rule. However, we note that if a final
U&O FIP is promulgated that includes requirements for managing
associated gas, as intended, we would expect that final FIP would
overlap with the 2018 BLM Venting and Flaring Rule. Specifically, we
would expect that oil and natural gas sources on the U&O Reservation
would face some overlapping requirements if the sources are also
subject to federal or Indian onshore oil and natural gas leases, or to
leases and business agreements entered into by the Tribe. There would
be no overlap for oil and natural gas sources on the U&O Reservation
that are not subject to federal or Indian onshore oil and gas leases or
tribal leases and business agreements--EPA's proposed FIP would apply
and BLM's rule would not. Because some facilities that will be subject
to a final U&O FIP may also be

subject to this BLM rule, we will consider the requirements of the BLM
rule in developing the final FIP. While our goal will be to avoid
conflicts between the EPA requirements and BLM requirements, it is
important to recognize that the EPA and the BLM are each operating
under different statutory authorities and mandates in developing their
rules. We expect sources subject to and in compliance with the control
requirements in this proposed U&O FIP, that are also subject to the BLM
Venting and Flaring Rule, will be able to demonstrate compliance with
BLM's rule by demonstrating compliance with this proposed U&O FIP, as
both were developed by consulting other applicable federal
requirements.

E. Effect on Determining Site-Specific Permitting Requirements

    As explained in Section IV.C., this rule is being proposed in
combination with a separate action amending the National O&NG FIP to
extend its construction authorization mechanism to apply on Indian
country lands within the U&O Reservation that are included in the Uinta
Basin Ozone Nonattainment Area until such time that this proposed U&O
FIP is finalized. The National O&NG FIP provides an alternative
compliance option for the requirement in the Federal Indian Country
Minor NSR rule for new and modified true minor oil and natural gas
sources to obtain a site-specific nonattainment permit before
construction. Sources covered by the streamlined construction
authorizations in the amended National O&NG FIP would not be subject
to, or exempt from, other federal CAA permitting requirements, such as
the Title V Operating Permit Program at 40 CFR part 71 or this proposed
U&O FIP. Sources complying with the amended O&NG FIP will be able to
take into account any VOC emission reductions from any required
controls under this proposed U&O FIP when calculating their PTE for
determining applicability of the particular permitting requirements to
new, modified and existing sources. Some sources' PTE for VOC, or any
other regulated NSR and/or Title V pollutant, may exceed the
applicability thresholds for PSD, Federal Indian Country Minor NSR
rule, or Title V permitting requirements even after complying with this
proposed rule (when finalized). In such cases, the owners or operators
of these sources will be required to apply for and obtain appropriate
permits before construction.

F. Evaluation of Emissions Impacts of the Proposed Rule

    The EPA has reviewed and quantified the estimated emissions impacts
from the emissions control measures proposed in this proposed U&O FIP
using the 2014 Uinta Basin Emission Inventory. We expect that the VOC
reductions achieved by this proposed U&O FIP will be beneficial for
reducing ambient ozone and HAP levels and the severity of any
exceedances of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS that may occur at any time of the
year. We are proposing a requirement for owners/operators to submit
emissions inventories on a triennial basis and will monitor changes in
the inventory along with monitoring ozone concentrations. Supporting
air quality information is discussed in the RIA for this rule.\91\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \91\ The RIA includes a more detailed explanation of the air
quality impacts of the proposed rule. It can be found in the docket
for this rule (Docket ID No. EPA-R08-OAR-2015-0709).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In our existing source emissions data review, we have determined
that a proposed requirement to at least a 95.0 percent VOC control
efficiency continuously for emissions from existing storage tanks,
glycol dehydrators and pneumatic pumps, and a proposed fugitive
emissions monitoring program at existing oil and natural gas sources,
will result in a reduction of VOC emissions of approximately 20,000
tpy. This number represents a 28 percent reduction of oil and natural
gas-related VOC emissions on the U&O Reservation (relative to the total
oil and natural gas-related VOC emissions for the Uinta Basin of more
than 71,000 tpy per the 2014 Uinta Basin Emissions Inventory). In
addition, this proposed U&O FIP represents an overall 26 percent
reduction in total oil and natural gas sector VOC emissions relative to
the inventory for the entire Uinta Basin. Relative to the 2014 NEI, the
proposed VOC reductions represent a 15 percent reduction in total VOC
emissions for all source sectors for the Basin, but a 25 percent
reduction during winter (excluding biogenic sources--see Section III.E)
for the Basin.
    The EPA estimates that the proposed rule will result in a reduction
of approximately 2,200 tpy of HAP and 59,000 tpy of methane as ``co-
benefits,'' \92\ as the emission reduction requirements to reduce VOC
emissions also reduce HAP and methane concentrations in the gases
routed to them at proportional rates, and in some cases conserve that
gas stream for market rather than burn it in a control device.
Estimates of how much gas would be conserved are discussed later in
Section IV.G. and in the RIA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \92\ The RIA includes a more detailed explanation of the air
quality and climate benefits of the proposed rule. It can be found
in the docket for this rule (Docket ID No. EPA-R08-OAR-2015-0709).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The use of combustors or flares to control VOC emissions generates
associated, unintended emissions of NOX and CO as part of
the combustion process. The EPA estimates that there would be an
associated increase of 93 tpy of NOX and 427 tpy of CO from
the use of combustion devices.\93\ When these emissions are distributed
across the sources that would be required to install a combustion
device, the emissions per source are very low. The estimated emissions
per source for both pollutants are substantially lower than the 10 tpy
threshold that triggers the requirement for minor sources to obtain a
permit under the Federal Indian Country Minor NSR rule.\94\ Therefore,
we are not concerned that the increases in NOX and CO
emissions would adversely impact the NO2 or CO NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \93\ The RIA includes a more detailed explanation of the air
quality impacts of the proposed rule. It can be found in the docket
for this rule (Docket ID No. EPA-R08-OAR-2015-0709).
    \94\ The RIA, accessible in the docket for this rulemaking
(Docket ID No. EPA-R08-OAR-2015-0709), contains additional
discussion regarding NOX and CO emissions resulting from
combustion in relation to the NO2 and CO NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

G. Costs and Benefits of the Proposed Rule

    To estimate the total cost of the proposed rule, as well as dollar-
per-ton VOC control cost effectiveness, the EPA relied on existing cost
analyses completed to support the 2015 NSPS OOOO revisions and NSPS
OOOOa,\95\ and the 2012 Colorado Regulation 7.\96\ To estimate the
number of sources and equipment impacted by this proposed U&O FIP, the
EPA relied on the 2014 Uinta Basin Emissions Inventory. An operator's
existing fleet of sources, site-specific conditions, and existing
control equipment will affect the annual cost impact on a given
operator and is expected to be variable. Additionally, the strategies
and controls required by this proposed U&O FIP will result in the
recovery and sale of gas that would otherwise be vented to the
atmosphere. These savings are included in the cost

analysis and will increase the cost effectiveness of the rule. The
complete cost analysis by the EPA to support this proposed U&O FIP is
included in the RIA for this rule.\97\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \95\ RIA of the Proposed Emission Standards for New and Modified
Sources in the Oil and Natural Gas Sector, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2010-0505, accessible at http://www.regulations.gov or https://www3.epa.gov/ttnecas1/regdata/RIAs/egughgnspsproposalria0326.pdf,
accessed August 19, 2019.
    \96\ Final Economic Impact Analysis per Sec.  25-7-110.5(4),
C.R.S. For Proposed revisions to Colorado Air Quality Control
Commission Regulation Number 7 (5 CCR 1001-9), January 30, 2014,
available in the docket for this rulemaking (Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2015-0709).
    \97\ The RIA, accessible in the docket for this rulemaking
includes a more detailed explanation of costs and benefits (Docket
ID No. EPA-R08-OAR-2015-0709).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the 2014 Uinta Basin Emissions Inventory, 2,524 of the
estimated 6,739 total existing sources on Indian country lands within
the U&O Reservation are likely to be impacted at least in part by the
requirements in this rulemaking for existing sources. A breakdown of
the estimated number of sources impacted by this proposed U&O FIP and
how they are affected is presented in Table 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \98\ This is the count of the total number of high-bleed
pneumatic controllers in the 2014 Uinta Basin Emissions Inventory,
which is what the total annualized cost to retrofit to low-bleed
controllers is based on. We elected to not determine how the
controllers are distributed across the sources on the U&O
Reservation, because it was not necessary for calculating costs.

           Table 2--Existing Sources Affected by Proposed Rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Proposed rule requirement:           Estimated sources affected
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Add a combustor to comply with FIP...  2,064.
Retrofit existing flare with auto      460.
 igniter to comply with FIP.
Conduct LDAR at well sites to comply   2,079.
 with FIP.
Conduct LDAR at compressor stations    8.
 to comply.
Retrofit existing high-bleed           1,503 units.\98\
 pneumatic controllers to low-bleed
 (1,503 units) to comply with FIP.
Comply with one or more requirements   2,524.
 of the rule.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Using the EPA and Colorado control cost estimates, the EPA
estimates the total capital cost of this proposed U&O FIP will be $280
million (incurred during the first three years of compliance, 2019-
2021) and the total annualized engineering costs of implementing all of
the controls outlined in this proposed U&O FIP is estimated to be $68
million in 2021 \99\ when using a 7 percent discount rate and $60
million when using a 3 percent discount rate.\100\ All costs and
benefits are in 2016 US dollars unless stated otherwise. Revenues from
additional recovered natural gas are estimated at $3.5 million in 2021,
assuming a wellhead natural gas price of $4.00 per thousand cubic feet,
as the EPA estimates that approximately 885 million cubic feet of
natural gas will be recovered in 2021 by implementing this proposed U&O
FIP. When estimated revenues from additional natural gas recovery are
included, the annualized engineering costs of this proposed U&O FIP are
estimated to be $64 million in 2021 when using a 7 percent discount
rate and $56 million when using a 3 percent discount rate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \99\ This estimate includes the costs of necessary recordkeeping
and reporting for compliance with the proposed requirements. It is
expected that maximum cost impacts to industry will occur during the
first calendar year of full compliance following the effective date
of the rule and will decrease in future years. Assuming the final
rule is promulgated and effective by the end of 2018, full
compliance under this proposed U&O FIP would be required by 2021 in
the worst-case scenario, taking into account the maximum extension
of the compliance deadline that the EPA anticipates might be granted
with sufficient justification from an operator. Therefore, the cost
year analyzed was 2021 for this proposed U&O FIP. The RIA,
accessible in the docket for this rulemaking includes a more
detailed explanation of benefits and costs (Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2015-0709).
    \100\ Estimated costs are for retrofitting existing sources
only. We did not calculate costs for new or modified sources,
because we presumed those sources would be required to implement the
proposed controls if they were required to obtain a site-specific
permit, rather than the streamlined construction authorization
mechanism of the amended National O&NG FIP that is being extended to
the portions of the Uinta Basin Ozone Nonattainment Area that
include Indian country within the U&O Reservation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As mentioned earlier, the total emissions reductions expected under
the proposed control requirements for existing sources are estimated to
be approximately 20,000 tpy \101\ of VOC: About 6,100 tpy from
controlling emissions from storage tanks, about 3,400 tpy from
controlling emissions from glycol dehydrators, and about 6,700 tpy from
controlling emissions from pneumatic pumps. We assume that all
emissions will be routed to a combustor that will be designed and
operated to continuously to meet at least a 95.0 percent VOC control
efficiency. For the remainder of the emission reductions, approximately
1,400 tpy of VOC emissions are achieved by implementing an LDAR program
and about 2,000 tpy of VOC emissions by retrofitting or replacing high-
bleed pneumatic controllers with low-bleed. It should be noted that the
2014 Uinta Basin Emissions Inventory has not included a methodology to
account for the phenomenon of ``super-emitters'' or fat-tail emission
distribution that is typically a result of abnormal process conditions.
Emissions resulting from this phenomenon are discussed in more detail
later in Section V.F. Implementing an LDAR program would result in
emissions reductions that include these emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \101\ The numbers do not sum to exactly 20,000 due to rounding.
All values have been individually rounded to two significant
figures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Using the total annualized cost of $68 million and applying a 7
percent discount rate, the cost of control is estimated to be $3,400
per ton of VOC reduced without accounting for product recovery savings.
Using $64 million at a 7 percent discount rate, the control cost is
estimated to be $3,300 per ton of VOC reduced when additional revenue
from product recovery is included. Using the total annualized cost of
$60 million at 3 percent discount rate, the cost of control is
estimated to be $3,000 per ton of VOC reduced without accounting for
product recovery savings; using $56 million at a 3 percent discount
rate, it is estimated to be $2,900 per ton of VOC reduced.
    We predict that there will be ozone and PM2.5 health
benefits from VOC reductions, as well as co-benefits for climate from
methane reductions and co-benefits for human health and ozone from HAP
reductions. These ``co-benefits'' would occur because the control
techniques to meet the standards simultaneously reduce VOC, methane,
and HAP emissions at proportional rates. As mentioned earlier, this
proposed U&O FIP is anticipated to reduce 59,000 tons of methane and
2,200 tons of HAP per year starting in the first year of full
compliance (2021). The annual CO2-equivalent (CO2
Eq.) methane emission reductions are estimated to be 1.3 million metric
tons by 2021. These pollutants are associated with substantial health,
welfare, and climate effects, which these emissions reductions will
help mitigate. Climate-related benefits from methane emission

reductions are monetized using an interim estimate of the domestic
social cost of methane, developed under Executive Order 13783.\102\ By
2021, the annual domestic climate-related benefits of the proposed
action are estimated to be $10 million using a 3 percent discount rate
and $2.9 million using a 7 percent discount rate.\103\ The HAP reduced
as a result of reducing VOC emissions come primarily from the
reductions in glycol dehydrator emissions. Reduction of these HAP are
particularly effective for two reasons: (1) Reduced exposure will
result in air toxics-related health benefits; and (2) those HAP are
highly reactive VOC that more readily form ozone, so reductions of
those HAP are expected to proportionately have a greater influence on
reducing ozone than reductions in other VOC. The specific control
techniques for this proposed U&O FIP are anticipated to have minor
emissions disbenefits (e.g., increases in emissions of NOX
and CO related to combustion of VOC).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \102\ See the RIA for more detailed information.
    \103\ The RIA, accessible in the docket for this rulemaking
includes a more detailed explanation of the climate-related benefits
(Docket ID No. EPA-R08-OAR-2015-0709)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The RIA\104\ for the recently revised ozone NAAQS contains a
detailed discussion of the current state of knowledge on the health
benefits associated with reducing ambient levels of ozone air
pollution. When we describe ozone health benefits, we generally group
them in two categories: (1) Reduced incidence of premature mortality
from exposure to ozone; and (2) reduced incidence of morbidity from
exposure to ozone. Reductions in premature mortality can occur either
as a result of reductions in short term exposures to ozone, which can
benefit people of all ages, or as a result of reductions in lifetime
exposures to ozone (age 30 to 99). Reduced morbidity from reduced
exposure can occur through reduced: (1) Hospital admissions for
respiratory reasons (age >65); (2) emergency department visits for
asthma (all ages); (3) asthma exacerbation (age 6-18); (4) minor
restricted-activity days (age 18-65); and (5) school absence days (age
5-17).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \104\ ``Regulatory Impact Analysis of the Final Revisions to the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ground-Level Ozone,''
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-452/R-15-007, September
2015, https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0169-0057, accessed August 16, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have not quantified the monetary benefits of the VOC emissions
reductions in the proposed rule and are including only a qualitative
discussion of the benefits of the expected reductions in ozone and
PM2.5 levels, for the reasons in the following discussion.
In other ozone-related rulemakings, when adequate data have been
available, the EPA has quantified several health effects and monetized
benefits of VOC reductions associated with exposure to ozone and
PM2.5. Including only a qualitative discussion of benefits
does not imply that these benefits do not exist, but merely that the
agency does not have enough data to quantitatively support such a
discussion. However, we expect that significant reductions in VOC
emissions will result in corresponding reductions in ozone formation
and the health and welfare effects associated with exposure to ozone.
    As explained previously, research studies have shown that ozone
levels in the Uinta Basin are most significantly influenced by VOC
emissions from the accumulation of existing minor oil and natural gas
production operations. However, although we expect significant VOC
emissions reductions, which will result in improvements in air quality
and will reduce the health and welfare effects that are associated with
exposure to ozone, fine particulate matter (PM2.5), and HAP,
we have determined that the VOC-related health benefits cannot be
quantified (and thus, monetized) for the elevated winter ozone observed
in the Uinta Basin, because current modeling tools using the NEI are
not sufficient to properly characterize ozone and PM2.5
formation for these winter ozone episodes due to uncertainties in
quantifying the local emissions from oil and gas operations. Existing
air quality modeling and measurement studies specific to the Uinta
Basin indicate that air quality models that use the 2011 NEI
underestimate the monitored elevated winter VOC and ozone
concentrations. Air quality model sensitivity simulations for the Uinta
Basin have shown that models can reproduce monitored ozone levels when
oil and gas emissions are increased to match monitored VOC levels;
thus, it is believed that models using the 2011 NEI fail to simulate
observed VOC and ozone levels because of ongoing uncertainties in
quantifying the local emissions from oil and natural gas
operations.\105\ But regardless of the quantitative uncertainties, we
expect that reductions in ambient VOC emissions will result in
reductions in winter ozone.\106\ Any reductions in ambient ozone levels
in the Uinta Basin are expected to lead to reductions in related
adverse public health and welfare effects associated with exposure to
ozone and is expected to meaningfully aid in compliance with the ozone
NAAQS for the Uinta Basin.\107\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \105\ Matichuk, R., Tonnesen, G., Luecken, D., Gilliam, R.,
Napelenok, S.L., Baker, K.R., Schwede, D., Murphy, B., Helmig, D.,
Lyman, S.N., Roselle, S. (2017). Evaluation of the Community
Multiscale Air Quality Model for simulating winter ozone formation
in the Uinta Basin. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres,
122, available in the docket for this rulemaking (Docket ID No. EPA-
R08-OAR-2015-0709). Like the Uinta Basin Ozone Studies discussed
earlier, the EPA study found that modeled ozone was strongly
sensitive to changes in VOC emissions, and that when oil and gas VOC
emissions were increased sufficiently such that the model matched
the measured VOC concentrations, the model also reproduced the
observed peak ozone concentrations. For oil and natural gas sources
in the Uinta Basin we are confident that the 2011 NEI underestimates
VOC and HAP emissions. We are also confident that the 2014 NEI,
though it was not used in the EPA study, underestimates VOC and HAP
emissions. For this and other reasons that are discussed in more
detail in the RIA, we are unable to conduct photochemical modeling
to quantify the impacts of this rule's proposed VOC emissions
reductions on winter ozone air quality in the Uinta Basin.
    \106\ The RIA includes a more detailed discussion of the
expected air quality benefits and impacts (Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2015-0709).
    \107\ The EPA discussed this position in detail when
promulgating the NSPS OOOO revisions and NSPS OOOOa, as well as when
promulgating the final revised ozone NAAQS, concluding that the
available VOC benefit-per-ton estimates are not appropriate to
calculate monetized benefits of those rules, even as a bounding
exercise. The dockets for both proposed rulemakings are available at
http://www.regulations.gov, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505-4776
and Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0699-4458.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To improve our ability to quantify these benefits in the future,
work is in progress to enhance emissions inventories in the Basin using
improved activity data, additional sources such as wastewater
evaporation ponds, and updated estimates of speciation from storage
tank emissions. Most recently, inventories were developed from operator
supplied activity and emissions information for 2014 and 2017.
Additionally, the EPA will continue to work with the Utah DAQ, the Ute
Tribe, and industry to collect comprehensive oil and natural gas
emissions inventories for the Uinta Basin. Future EPA work will focus
on improving the emissions factors and speciation profiles used in the
development of emissions inventories--efforts that will help improve
air quality model performance.
    Considering all the quantified costs and benefits of this rule,
including the revenues from recovered natural gas that would otherwise
be vented, the quantified equivalent annualized costs (the difference
between the monetized benefits and compliance costs) are estimated to
be negative $39 million in 2021 using a 3 percent interest rate and

negative $46 million in 2021 using a 7 percent interest rate.\108\ In
light of the many unquantified but real and meaningful benefits noted
above, the actual equivalent annualized costs are expected to be much
less. We cannot estimate these costs with any confidence.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \108\ The RIA in the docket for this rulemaking discusses this
calculation in detail.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are soliciting comment on all assumptions used to calculate
costs and effectiveness of proposed control requirements, and benefits
of the emissions reductions, all of which are detailed in the RIA and
other supporting documentation available in the docket for this
proposed U&O FIP.

V. Summary of FIP Provisions

    This proposed rule would apply to owners or operators of oil and
natural gas sources that either produce oil and natural gas or process
natural gas and that are located on Indian country lands within the U&O
Reservation that meet the applicability criteria specified for each set
of requirements.
    This proposed U&O FIP includes the following provisions:

49.4169 Introduction
49.4170 Delegation of authority of administration to the tribe
49.4171 General provisions
49.4172 Emissions Inventory
49.4173 Nonattainment Requirements for New or Modified True Minor Oil
and Natural Gas Sources
49.4174 VOC emission control requirements for storage tanks
49.4175 VOC emission control requirements for dehydrators
49.4176 VOC emission control requirements for pneumatic pumps
49.4177 VOC emission control requirements for covers and closed-vent
systems
49.4178 VOC emission control devices
49.4179 VOC emission control requirements for fugitive emissions
49.4180 VOC emission control requirements for Tank Truck Loading
49.4181 VOC emission control requirements for pneumatic controllers
49.4182 Other combustion devices
49.4183 Monitoring requirements
49.4184 Recordkeeping requirements
49.4185 Notification and reporting requirements

    We do not expect a substantial number of oil and natural gas
sources subject to this proposed U&O FIP's requirements to also be
subject to NSPS OOOO or OOOOa, or NESHAP HH. However, to alleviate some
of the regulatory burden of this proposed U&O FIP, we are proposing
that any equipment or activities affected by any requirement in this
proposed U&O FIP that are subject to the substantive emissions control
requirements in the EPA standards, as appropriate, will not be subject
to this proposed U&O FIP's substantive emissions control requirements
for such equipment and activities. As an example, given the proposed
exemptions, as a practical matter, a new or modified oil and natural
gas source on the U&O Reservation that has storage tanks, glycol
dehydrators, pneumatic pumps and fugitive emissions components and the
storage tanks, pneumatic pumps and fugitive emissions components are
subject to the emissions control requirements of NSPS OOOOa, then that
source would be subject to the substantive emissions control
requirements for glycol dehydrators in the FIP, but not to the FIP's
substantive emissions control requirements for storage tanks, pneumatic
pumps or fugitive emissions components.

A. Introduction

    We are proposing in Sec.  49.4169 (Introduction) to specify: (1)
The purpose of this proposed U&O FIP; (2) the general applicability to
the provisions of this proposed U&O FIP; and (3) the compliance
schedule for this proposed U&O FIP.
    We are proposing text that: (1) Establishes provisions for
delegation of authority to allow the Ute Indian Tribe to assist the EPA
with administration of this proposed U&O FIP in Sec.  49.4170; (2)
establishes general provisions and definitions applicable to oil and
natural gas sources in Sec.  49.4171; (3) establishes a requirement for
oil and natural gas sources to submit emissions inventories on a
triennial basis, beginning with an inventory for calendar year 2017 in
Sec.  49.4172; (4) establishes in Sec.  49.4173 enforceable
requirements to control emissions of VOC and other pollutants from new
and modified true minor oil and natural gas sources in the oil and
natural gas production and natural gas processing segments of the oil
and natural gas sector that commence construction on or after the
effective date of this proposed U&O FIP, unless the source obtains a
site-specific construction permit, or is otherwise required to obtain a
site-specific permit by the Reviewing Authority, in accordance with 40
CFR 49.151 through 49.161; and (5) establishes in Sec. Sec.  49.4174
through 49.4185, enforceable requirements to control and reduce VOC
emissions from oil and natural gas well production and storage
operations, natural gas processing, and gathering and boosting
operations at oil and natural gas sources that are located on Indian
country lands within the U&O Reservation.
    We may issue a final action based on this proposal as soon as the
date of publication of a final U&O FIP. We believe that there may be
``good cause,'' within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), to make the
final rule effective as soon as it is published, if that is needed to
ensure that this rule begins to provide emission reductions before the
next winter ozone season. As discussed above in section II.D., winter
ozone in the Uinta Basin is a serious public health problem, which this
proposed rule is intended to help address.
    In addition, the reductions provided by this rule are an integral
part of the Agency's strategy to address the air quality problem on the
U&O Reservation while maintaining a permitting mechanism that allows
appropriate continued oil and natural gas production. The primary other
component of that strategy is a separate action to amend the National
O&NG FIP to extend its geographic coverage to the Indian country
portions of the U&O Reservation that are part of the Uinta Basin Ozone
Nonattainment Area. Over the long term, we are relying on the VOC
emissions reductions in this action to support this extension of the
scope of the National O&NG FIP. Accordingly, if making this rule
effective on publication is necessary to begin effecting VOC emission
reductions before the next winter ozone season, then doing so will help
ensure that the amendment to the National O&NG FIP is compatible with
air quality improvement on the U&O Reservation.
    Accordingly, the EPA proposes to find that there is good cause to
make the final action based on this proposal effective on the date of
publication of the final rule. We invite comment on this proposed
approach.
    We are proposing that compliance with the rule for oil and natural
gas sources that commence construction on or after the effective date
of the final rule would be required upon startup. Compliance for
sources that are existing as of the effective date of the final rule
would be required no later than 18 months after the effective date of
the final rule. We concluded that it is important to allow owners/
operators of existing sources a reasonable period of time to conduct
any necessary retrofit-related activities, such as (1) acquiring
control devices, (2) conducting manufacturer-recommended testing to be
compliant with the proposed

requirements, and (3) securing the necessary trained personnel to
install compliant devices and associated piping and instrumentation. We
expect that there will be about 2,100 existing oil and natural gas
sources that may require equipment retrofit and installation of VOC
emission control equipment (combustor controls) under the proposed
rule. Additionally, we estimate that a total of approximately 1,500
high-bleed pneumatic controllers will need to be retrofitted to low- or
no-bleed. We have determined that providing 18 months from the
effective date of the final rule to install retrofits at existing
sources is a reasonable amount of time for efficient, cost-effective
project planning that accounts for a level, sustained equipment and
labor resource demand that can be supported by the vendor
community.\109\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \109\ We recognize that 18 months is a tighter compliance
timeframe than is required in NESHAP regulations, which is typically
3 years. The purpose of this proposed U&O FIP, though, is to address
air quality in a timely fashion. Moreover, the proposal allows
sources to request extensions of the compliance date beyond the 18
months as needed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This assessment is supported by what we have learned about the time
needed for sources in Utah-regulated areas to comply with Utah's
requirements for oil and natural gas sources. In particular, we have
been informed by UDEQ compliance staff that the majority of existing
oil and natural gas sources that have been required to install VOC
emission control retrofits in State of Utah jurisdictions have
completed the required retrofits within 9 months of the effective dates
of their minor source approval orders, ahead of the 18-month deadline
in UDEQ approval orders for operators to notify the UDEQ of the status
of retrofit construction.\110\ However, there are many more existing
oil and natural gas sources on the U&O Reservation that would be
required to install retrofits to control emissions from storage tanks,
glycol dehydrators, and pneumatic pumps under this proposed U&O FIP
than are estimated to be subject to equivalent requirements in UDEQ
jurisdiction. The UDEQ estimates that approximately 1,600 existing
sources have been required to control emissions from storage tanks,
glycol dehydrator, and/or pneumatic pumps on non-Indian country lands
in the Uinta Basin, while we estimate there are approximately 2,100
sources on Indian country lands within the U&O Reservation that would
be subject to such requirements in this proposed U&O FIP. Therefore, it
is likely owners/operators may need longer than 9 months to complete
the necessary retrofits to the greater number of Indian country
sources. The 18-month compliance schedule in this proposed U&O FIP will
allow time for operators to conduct the necessary retrofits, while at
the same time starting to achieve VOC emissions reductions as soon as
practicable, so that the reductions will have a timely, beneficial
impact on air quality and human health and progress toward attaining
the ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \110\ Email correspondence with UDEQ staff regarding their
source inventory and experiences regulating existing oil and natural
gas sources in State of Utah jurisdiction is included in the docket
for this rulemaking (Docket ID No. EPA-R08-OAR-2015-0709). UDEQ
compliance staff target each new approval order for inspection
within 18 months of the date it is issued. They document the status
of construction at the time of inspection and note whether the
permitted source has provided a notification of construction status,
which is required within 18 months of the date the approval order is
issued. UDEQ compliance staff have inspected hundreds of such
existing oil and natural gas sources without observing any
compliance issues with the 18-month notification requirement. While
UDEQ compliance staff do not compile this information into any
readily available summary format, details about the status of
construction are included in the inspection report for each source.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are also proposing to allow an owner or operator to submit a
written request to the EPA for an extension of the compliance deadline
for existing sources, which must include a detailed explanation of the
reason for the request. Any approval or denial of an extension request,
including the length of any approved extension, will be based upon the
merits of each case. Factors that the EPA will consider in deciding
whether to grant an extension request under the proposed provision
include the economic and technical feasibility of meeting this proposed
U&O FIP's control requirements in the timeframe prescribed in it. We
are seeking comment on the proposed compliance schedules, or
alternative compliance schedules that may be more appropriate,
including information that supports the proposed time period or a
different time period, such as data on average times to acquire,
install, and test or obtain manufacturer certification of compliant
control devices.

B. Provisions for Delegation of Administration to the Tribe

    We are proposing in Sec.  49.4170 (Delegation of Authority of
Administration to the Tribe) to establish the steps by which the Ute
Indian Tribe may request delegation to assist us with the
administration of this rule and the process by which the Regional
Administrator of EPA Region 8 may delegate to the Ute Indian Tribe the
authority to assist with such administration. As described in the
regulatory provisions, any such delegation will be accomplished through
a delegation of authority agreement between the Regional Administrator
and the Tribe. This section would provide for administrative delegation
of this federal rule and does not affect the eligibility criteria under
CAA section 301(d) and 40 CFR 49.6 for TAS should the Ute Indian Tribe
decide to seek such treatment for the purpose of administering their
own EPA-approved TIP under tribal law. Administrative delegation is a
separate process from TAS under the TAR. Under the TAR, Indian tribes
seek the EPA's approval of their eligibility to implement CAA programs
under their own laws. The Ute Indian Tribe will not need to seek TAS
under the TAR for purposes of requesting to assist us with
administration of this rule through a delegation of authority
agreement. If delegation does occur, the rule would continue to operate
under federal authority on Indian country lands within the U&O
Reservation, and the Ute Indian Tribe would assist us with
administration of the rule to the extent specified in the agreement.

C. General Provisions

    We are proposing in Sec.  49.4171 (General Provisions): (1) A
requirement to design, operate, and maintain all equipment used for
hydrocarbon liquid and gas collection, storage, processing, and
handling operations covered under this rule, in a manner consistent
with good air pollution control practices and that minimizes leakage of
VOC emissions to the atmosphere; (2) definitions; (3) assurances that,
in order to ensure compliance, we will maintain our authority to
require testing, monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting in addition
to that already required by an applicable requirement in a permit to
construct or permit to operate; and (4) assurance that nothing in the
rule will preclude the use, including the exclusive use, of any
credible evidence or information, relevant to whether a source would
have been in compliance with applicable requirements if the appropriate
performance or compliance test had been performed.

D. Emissions Inventory Requirements

    We are proposing in Sec.  49.4172 a requirement for owners/
operators of oil and natural gas sources with the potential to emit one
or more NSR-regulated pollutants at levels greater than one tpy to
submit an annual emissions inventory once every three years, that
covers emissions from the previous calendar year, beginning with
calendar year 2017. This requirement will suffice for the purpose of
continued

updates to the comprehensive Uinta Basin oil and natural gas emissions
inventory effort by the UDEQ, Ute Indian Tribe and the EPA. Owners/
operators will be required to submit actual emissions for each
emissions unit at each oil and natural gas source covered by the
requirement in a standard format specified by the Regional Office and
available on our website by the effective date of the final rule. The
format will be consistent with the format used by the UDEQ to collect
information from sources outside of Indian country lands within the U&O
Reservation.

E. Compliance With the National Indian Country Oil and Natural Gas
Federal Implementation Plan for New and Modified True Minor Oil and
Natural Gas Sources in the Uinta Basin Ozone Nonattainment Area

    From a regulatory standpoint, the effect of this action is to shift
the requirement for compliance with the National O&NG FIP from one part
of the CFR to another. Currently, new and modified true minor oil and
natural gas sources proposing to locate or expand on Indian country
lands within the U&O Reservation that are part of the Uinta Basin Ozone
Nonattainment Area must comply with the National O&NG FIP, as a result
of the recent action we took amending that FIP. The provisions of the
National O&NG FIP that the recent action requires compliance with
concern 40 CFR 49.101 through 49.105. This proposed action merely
shifts these requirements located at 40 CFR part 49, subpart C, to 40
CFR part 49, subpart K, as part of this proposed U&O FIP, for the
reasons stated previously. Additionally, these sources are also subject
to applicable requirements in the Federal Indian Country Minor NSR Rule
also found in subpart C at 40 CFR 49.151 through 49.161, including the
2-part registration requirement.
    In Sec.  49.4173 (Compliance with the National Indian Country Oil
and Natural Gas Federal Implementation Plan for New and Modified True
Minor Oil and Natural Gas Sources in the Uinta Basin Ozone
Nonattainment Area), we are proposing that new and modified true minor
oil and natural gas sources proposing to locate or expand on Indian
country lands within the U&O Reservation that are part of the Uinta
Basin Ozone Nonattainment Area continue to permanently comply with the
National O&NG FIP (excluding Sec.  49.101(d), which indicates that the
National O&NG FIP does not apply in nonattainment areas), unless the
owner or operator of a source opts out of the National O&NG FIP's
permitting approach or is otherwise required by the EPA to obtain a
site-specific minor source permit according to the Federal Indian
Country Minor NSR Program at 40 CFR part 49. For the purposes of this
proposed rule, a new or modified true minor oil and natural gas source
is one constructed or modified on or after the effective date of this
proposed U&O FIP. This continued permanent application of the National
O&NG FIP to the Indian country lands within the U&O Reservation that
are included in the Uinta Basin Ozone Nonattainment Area covers only
new and modified true minor oil and natural gas sources in the oil and
natural gas production and natural gas processing segments of the oil
and natural gas sector.
    Applying the requirements of the National O&NG FIP to the Uinta
Basin Ozone Nonattainment Area fulfills the EPA's obligation under the
Federal Indian Country Minor NSR rule to issue minor source NSR pre-
construction permits when combined with the existing source emissions
reductions that would be required by this proposed U&O FIP. The EPA is
seeking comment only on the proposal to continue to permanently apply
the National O&NG FIP to sources on Indian country lands within the U&O
Reservation that are part of the Uinta Basin Ozone Nonattainment Area;
we are not re-proposing for comment the requirements of the National
O&NG FIP.
    The National O&NG FIP provides an efficient and effective,
alternative approach that fulfills the minor NSR permitting
requirement, while also ensuring air quality protection through
requirements that are unambiguous and legally and practicably
enforceable. The National O&NG FIP approach is also transparent to the
public; it is clear to the public what requirements apply. The National
O&NG FIP reduces burden for sources and the Reviewing Authority and
minimizes potential delays in new construction due to compliance with
the minor NSR permitting obligation.
    Upon application of the National O&NG FIP to the Indian country
lands within the U&O Reservation that are part of the Uinta Basin Ozone
Nonattainment Area, new and modified true minor sources will have to
address three sets of requirements.
    First, under the National O&NG FIP that applies to new and modified
true minor sources on the Indian country portions of the U&O
Reservation that are part of the Uinta Basin Ozone Nonattainment Area,
compliance with eight federal standards is required for the following
equipment in the oil and natural gas production and natural gas
processing segments of the oil and natural gas sector: Compression
ignition and spark ignition engines; process heaters; combustion
turbines; fuel storage tanks; glycol dehydrators; completion of
hydraulically fractured oil and natural gas wells; reciprocating and
centrifugal compressors (except those at well sites); pneumatic
controllers; pneumatic pumps; storage vessels; and fugitive emissions
from well sites, compressor stations, and natural gas processing
plants.
    Sources must comply with all of the provisions of the eight federal
standards (unless a provision is specifically excluded), as applicable
to oil and natural gas sources under each standard: (1) 40 CFR part 63,
subpart DDDDD, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
for Major Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers
and Process Heaters; (2) 40 CFR part 63, subpart ZZZZ, National
Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Stationary
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines; (3) 40 CFR part 60, subpart
IIII, Standards of Performance for Stationary Compression Ignition
Internal Combustion Engines; (4) 40 CFR part 60, subpart JJJJ,
Standards of Performance for Stationary Spark Ignition Internal
Combustion Engines; (5) 40 CFR part 60, subpart Kb, Standards of
Performance for Volatile Organic Liquid Storage Vessels (Including
Petroleum Liquid Storage Vessels) for Which Construction,
Reconstruction, or Modification Commenced After July 23, 1984; (6) 40
CFR part 60, subpart OOOOa, Standards of Performance for Crude Oil and
Natural Gas Facilities for which Construction, Modification, or
Reconstruction Commenced after September 18, 2015; (7) 40 CFR part 63,
subpart HH, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
from Oil and Natural Gas Production Facilities; and (8) 40 CFR part 60,
subpart KKKK, Standards of Performance for New Stationary Combustion
Turbines.
    Under the National O&NG FIP, true minor sources must comply with
these standards, as they currently exist or as amended in the future,
except for those provisions specifically excluded under the National
O&NG FIP (and unless the source opts out of the FIP and obtains a site-
specific permit or is otherwise required to obtain a site-specific
permit by the Reviewing Authority). New and modified sources subject to
the National O&NG FIP would be subject to any future changes to the
eight underlying EPA standards only if they undergo a future minor
modification as a true minor source and would otherwise be subject to
those future changes. To help

understand the requirements of the National O&NG FIP, you may wish to
review the provisions for each of the eight federal rules (i.e., five
NSPS and three NESHAP) identified in the National O&NG FIP. (The
National O&NG FIP does not change the applicability of the specified
standards, nor does it relieve sources subject to the standards from
complying with them, independently of that FIP.)
    It is important to note that compliance with these eight standards
in the National O&NG FIP would not relieve the owners/operators of oil
and natural gas sources from the obligation to comply with the proposed
requirements of Sec. Sec.  49.4169 through 49.4171 and 49.4174 through
49.4185, as applicable. Those proposed U&O Reservation-specific
requirements would apply to sources regardless of whether they are
existing, new or modified. Because the proposed U&O Reservation-
specific requirements would exempt affected emissions units or
activities that are subject to and controlled according to equivalent
NSPS requirements, we expect that duplicative requirements will be
avoided. Further we expect that the emissions reductions achieved from
existing sources complying with those proposed U&O Reservation-specific
requirements will provide justification for the proposed approval of
new or modified true minor oil and natural gas sources on the U&O
Reservation through the National O&NG FIP.
    Second, under the Indian Country Minor NSR rule (Sec.  49.160(c)),
new and modified sources subject to the National O&NG FIP must satisfy
the requirement for two-part registration by using the two registration
forms provided by the EPA \111\ rather than a permit application (as
mentioned earlier in Section IV.C). The registration forms contain the
information required in Sec.  49.160(c)(2). True minor sources
complying with the National O&NG FIP must submit the Part 1
Registration Form, with the information required by Sec.  49.160(c)(2),
at least 30 days before beginning construction. The Part 2 Registration
Form must be submitted within 60 days after the ``startup of
production'' as defined in Sec.  49.152(d). The source must determine
the potential for emissions within 30 days after startup of production.
The combination of the Part 1 and Part 2 Registration Forms submittal
satisfies the requirements in Sec.  49.160(c)(2). The forms are
submitted instead of the application form otherwise required in Sec.
49.160(c)(1)(iii). After being reviewed by the permitting authority,
completed registration forms will be available online on the
appropriate EPA Regional Office website.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \111\ The registration forms are available at: https://www.epa.gov/tribal-air/tribal-minor-new-source-review (accessed
August 16, 2019) or from the EPA Regional Offices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, under the National O&NG FIP, before beginning construction
new and modified sources must document that potential impacts on
threatened and endangered species and historic properties (collectively
referred to as ``protected resources'') have been assessed. 40 CFR
49.104. The section provides two options for documenting this
assessment: (1) Submittal of documentation to the EPA Regional Office
(and to the relevant tribe for the area where the source is located or
locating) that a site-specific assessment conducted by another federal
agency has been completed for the specific oil and natural gas
activity, and that the owner/operator meets all air quality-related
requirements as specified within all documents/approvals obtained
through that assessment (these requirements are typically implemented
and enforced as conditions of an approved Surface Use Plan of
Operations and/or Application for Permit to Drill); \112\ or (2)
submittal of documentation to the EPA Regional Office (and to the
relevant tribe for the area where the source is located or locating)
demonstrating that the source has completed the screening processes
specified by the EPA for consideration of threatened and endangered
species and historic properties and received a written determination
from the EPA stating that it has satisfactorily completed these
processes.\113\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \112\ This assessment will typically be conducted through the
National Environmental Policy Act process and result in either a
Record of Decision or a Finding of No Significant Impact document.
    \113\ This process of source documentation submittal and the
EPA's confirmation that it has satisfactorily completed the
procedures must occur before the source submits its Part 1
Registration Form pursuant to Sec.  49.160(c)(1)(iv). These
processes are contained in ``Procedures to Address Threatened and
Endangered Species and Historic Properties for the Federal
Implementation Plan for Managing Air Emissions from True Minor
Sources in Indian Country in the Oil and Natural Gas Production and
Natural Gas Processing Segments of the Oil and Natural Gas Sector,''
available at https://www.epa.gov/tribal-air/tribal-minor-new-source-review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are taking comment on this approach of shifting compliance with
the National O&NG FIP for new and modified true minor oil and natural
gas sources on the U&O Reservation portions of the Uinta Basin Ozone
Nonattainment Area from 40 CFR part 49, subpart C to 40 CFR part 49,
subpart K as part of this proposed U&O FIP, in addition to the proposed
VOC emissions reduction requirements in the proposed U&O FIP.

F. VOC Emissions Control Requirements

    The discussion in this subsection details the proposed VOC
emissions control requirements and how they compare to existing state
and federal requirements for the equipment and activities listed in
Table 3. The most notable difference between the proposed VOC emissions
control requirements for this FIP and the Utah Oil and Gas Rules and
Utah Permit Requirements is that the 4 tpy combined VOC emissions
threshold requiring controls in the Utah permit by rule does not
include pneumatic pump emissions. The reason for this difference is
that we have identified that emissions from pneumatic pumps are a large
source of VOC emissions on the U&O Reservation, but a negligible source
of VOC emissions in the Utah jurisdiction in the Basin, because the
majority of natural gas production occurs on the Reservation. This
difference is explained in more detail later in this section.

  Table 3--Proposed VOC Emissions Control Requirements for New, Modified and Existing Oil and Natural Gas Sources Versus UDEQ and Federal \114\ Control
                                                                      Requirements
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Proposed VOC emissions controls                       Utah oil and gas
-------------------------------------------------------------------------   rules and  Utah
                                                      Control efficiency        permit             NSPS OOOO          NSPS OOOOa           NESHAP HH
 Proposed requirements (section)     TPY threshold         (percent)         requirements
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Storage Tank VOC Emission         Source-wide         See VOC emission    Issued Utah Permit  Control individual  Control individual  Control individual
 Control Requirements (49.4174).   uncontrolled VOC    control devices     Requirements        tanks with PTE      tanks with PTE      tanks with
                                   emissions from      later in this       (BACT for site-     >=6 tpy per tank    >=6 tpy per tank    potential for
                                   storage tanks,      table (49.4178).    specific &          constructed after   constructed after   flash emissions
                                   dehydrators and                         general approval    August 23, 2011     September 18,       and actual annual
                                   pneumatic pumps                         orders)--Same as    (alternatively no   2015                average
                                   >=4 tpy.                                proposed FIP.       control required    (alternatively no   hydrocarbon
                                  Or for storage                          Utah Oil and Gas     if uncontrolled     control required    liquid throughput
                                   tanks-only                              Rules--Control      VOC emissions       if uncontrolled     >=79,500 liters/
                                   sources,                                storage tanks if    maintained <4       VOC emissions       day.
                                   throughput of                           source throughput   tpy).               maintained <4
                                   8,000 barrels                           >=8,000 bbl crude                       tpy).
                                   (bbl) of crude                          oil or 2,000 bbl
                                   oil or 2,000 bbl                        condensate, on
                                   condensate on                           rolling 12-month
                                   rolling 12-month                        basis--unless <=4
                                   basis--unless <=4                       tpy source-wide
                                   tpy source-wide                         VOC from storage
                                   VOC from storage                        tanks (does not
                                   tanks.                                  include pneumatic
                                                                           pump emissions).
Dehydrators VOC Emission Control                      See VOC emission    Issued Utah Permit  Not covered.......  Not covered.......  Units at non-urban
 Requirements (49.4175).                               control devices     Requirements                                                area sources with
                                                       later in this       (BACT for site-                                             actual annual
                                                       table (49.4178).    specific &                                                  average flowrate
                                                                           general approval                                            of natural gas
                                                                           orders)--Same as                                            <85,000 standard
                                                                           proposed FIP.                                               m\3\/day not
                                                                          Utah Oil and Gas                                             covered--this is
                                                                           Rules--Control                                              majority of units
                                                                           dehydrators if                                              on U&O
                                                                           combined                                                    Reservation.
                                                                           emissions from
                                                                           dehydrators and
                                                                           storage tanks >=4
                                                                           tpy VOC (does not
                                                                           include pneumatic
                                                                           pump emissions).
Pneumatic Pumps VOC Emission                          See VOC emission    Issued Utah Permit  Not covered.......  For well sites,     Not covered.
 Control Requirements (49.4176).                       control devices     Requirements                            hook up to
                                                       later in this       (BACT for site-                         control device if
                                                       table (49.4178).    specific &                              already on site
                                                                           general approval                        and constructed
                                                                           orders)--Same as                        after September
                                                                           proposed FIP--.                         18, 2015.
                                                                          Utah Oil and Gas                        For natural gas
                                                                           Rules does not                          processing
                                                                           require control                         plants, zero
                                                                           of pneumatic pump                       natural gas
                                                                           emissions.                              emissions.
Covers and Closed-Vent System     Source-wide         100%..............  100% in issued      100 percent of      100 percent of      100 percent If
 VOC Emission Control              uncontrolled VOC                        Utah Permit         storage tank        storage tank        required to
 Requirements (49.4177).           emissions from                          Requirements and    emissions, if       emissions, if       control glycol
                                   storage tanks,                          Rules (BACT for     constructed after   constructed after   dehydrators and/
                                   dehydrators and                         site-specific &     August 23, 2011.    September 18,       or storage vessel
                                   pneumatic pumps                         general approval                        2015.               HAP emissions.
                                   >=4 tpy.                                orders).
                                  Or for storage                          Utah Oil and Gas
                                   tanks-only                              Rules--Like
                                   sources,                                proposed FIP
                                   throughput of                           (except Utah Oil
                                   8,000 bbl of                            and Gas Rules do
                                   crude oil or                            not include
                                   2,000 bbl                               pneumatic pump
                                   condensate on                           emissions).
                                   rolling 12-month
                                   basis--unless <=4
                                   tpy source-wide
                                   VOC from storage
                                   tanks.
VOC Emission Control Devices      Source-wide         95.0 percent        98.0 percent        95.0 percent        95.0 percent        If required to
 (49.4178).                        uncontrolled VOC    continuously.       continuous VOC      continuous VOC      continuous VOC      control glycol
                                   emissions from                          control             control             control             dehydrator or
                                   storage tanks,                          efficiency for      efficiency, for     efficiency, for     storage vessel
                                   dehydrators and                         Issued Utah         use on tanks with   use on tanks with   HAP emissions,
                                   pneumatic pumps                         Permit              PTE >=6 tpy per     PTE >=6 tpy per     must reduce HAP
                                   >=4 tpy.                                Requirements        tank if             tank, if            by 95.0 percent,
                                  Or for storage                           (BACT for site-     constructed after   constructed after   or maintain <20
                                   tanks-only                              specific &          August 23, 2011.    September 18,       ppmv or 1 tpy
                                   sources,                                general approval                        2015.               benzene.
                                   throughput of                           orders).
                                   8,000 bbl of                           Same as proposed
                                   crude oil or                            FIP for Utah Oil
                                   2,000 bbl                               and Gas Rules.
                                   condensate on
                                   rolling 12-month
                                   basis--unless <=4
                                   tpy source-wide
                                   VOC from storage
                                   tanks.
Fugitive Emissions VOC Emission   Sources required    NA--Semi-annual     Utah Oil and Gas    Only for natural    At least quarterly  Ensure closed-vent
 Control Requirements (49.4179).   to control          surveys.            Rules--Same as      gas processing      surveys for         system operates
                                   storage vessel,                         Proposed FIP for    plants--At least    natural gas         with no
                                   dehydrator and/or                       well sites.         annual surveys.     processing          detectable
                                   pneumatic pump                         Issued Utah Permit                       plants, quarterly   emissions if
                                   emissions (per                          Requirements                            surveys for         required to
                                   49.4174 through                         (sources exempt                         compressor          control glycol
                                   49.4178).                               from Utah Oil and                       stations and semi-  dehydrator or
                                                                           Gas Rules)                              annual surveys      storage vessel
                                                                           require LDAR,                           for well sites,     HAP emissions.
                                                                           ranging from                            if constructed or
                                                                           annual to                               modified after
                                                                           quarterly for oil                       September 18,
                                                                           and natural gas                         2015.
                                                                           sources,
                                                                           including
                                                                           compressor
                                                                           stations.

Tank Truck Loading VOC Emission   None--applies to    NA--Bottom filling  Utah Oil and Gas    Not covered.......  Not covered.......  Not covered.
 Control Requirements (49.4180).   all existing        or submerged fill   Rules--more
                                   sources.            pipe.               stringent, as
                                                                           capture and
                                                                           control of VOC
                                                                           emissions
                                                                           required at
                                                                           sources required
                                                                           to control
                                                                           storage vessel
                                                                           and glycol
                                                                           dehydrator
                                                                           emissions.
Pneumatic Controllers VOC                             NA--meet the        Utah Oil and Gas    Zero-bleed for      Zero-bleed for      Not covered.
 Emission Control Requirements                         standards of NSPS   Rules--Same as      processing plants   processing plants
 (49.4181).                                            OOOO.               Proposed FIP--.     and low-bleed (<6   and low-bleed (<6
                                                                                scfh) elsewhere,    scfh) elsewhere,
                                                                                if constructed      if constructed
                                                                                after October 15,   after September
                                                                                2013.               18, 2015.
Other combustion devices                              NA--must have       Utah Oil and Gas    Not covered.......  Not covered.......  Not covered.
 (49.4182).                                            automatic           Rules--Same as
                                                       ignition device.    proposed FIP.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Storage Tanks, Glycol Dehydrators, and Pneumatic Pumps
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \114\ The National O&NG FIP incorporates the requirements of the
eight standards, as they apply to a source. To make emissions
control requirements across the Basin consistent, this proposed U&O
FIP goes beyond the eight federal standards to regulate certain
equipment and activities that are not regulated by established EPA
standards (or are regulated differently) but are regulated in UDEQ
standards. The EPA is in the process of reviewing certain provisions
of NSPS OOOOa. The requirements summarized in this table are the
requirements effective at the time of publication of this NPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For new, modified and existing sources, we are proposing in
Sec. Sec.  49.4174 (Storage Tank VOC Emission Control Requirements),
49.4175 (Dehydrators VOC Emission Control Requirements), and 49.4176
(Pneumatic Pumps VOC Emission Control Requirements) to require that
owners and operators of affected storage tanks, glycol dehydrators and
natural gas-driven pneumatic pumps either: (1) Reduce VOC emissions
from working, standing, breathing, and flashing losses from crude oil,
condensate, and produced water storage tanks, glycol dehydrator process
vents (glycol dehydrator regenerator or still vent and the vent from
the dehydrator flash tank, if present), and pneumatic pumps, by at
least 95.0 percent on a continuous basis; or (2) maintain the source-
wide uncontrolled actual VOC emissions from all storage tanks, glycol
dehydrators, and pneumatic pumps at a rate of less than 4 tpy, or at a
source that contains only storage tanks and does not contain glycol
dehydrators or pneumatic pumps, maintain the source-wide throughput at
less than 8,000 barrels (bbl) of crude oil or 2,000 bbl of condensate
in any consecutive 12-month period. We are proposing that applicability
for the VOC emissions control requirements be determined specifically
according to the following criteria. For oil and natural gas sources
that began operation before the effective date of the final rule, we
are proposing that applicability be determined using uncontrolled
actual emissions or actual throughput based on 12 consecutive months of
data. For oil and natural gas sources that begin operation or
modification after the effective date of the final rule, we are
proposing that applicability for glycol dehydrators and pneumatic pumps
be determined using potential to emit and we are proposing that
emissions from all storage tanks be controlled upon startup for a
minimum of 12 consecutive months. This requirement for new and modified
storage tanks is being proposed because of the uncertainty of well
production levels before operation begins. After a minimum of 12
consecutive months of operation, controls may be removed if source-wide
uncontrolled actual VOC emissions from all storage tanks, glycol
dehydrators, and pneumatic pumps are demonstrated to be less than 4
tpy, or, at a source containing only storage tanks, source-wide
throughput is demonstrated to be less than 8,000 bbl of crude or 2,000
bbl of condensate.
    We are proposing that owners or operators must demonstrate that the
source-wide uncontrolled actual VOC emissions from crude oil,
condensate, and produced water storage tanks, glycol dehydrator process
vents, and pneumatic pumps have been maintained below 4 tpy using
records of monthly determinations of uncontrolled actual VOC emission
rates for the 12 consecutive months immediately preceding the
demonstration. The uncontrolled actual VOC emissions rate must be
calculated using a generally accepted model or calculation methodology.
    The proposal would require that the owner or operator re-evaluate
the source-wide uncontrolled actual VOC emissions or the source-wide
throughput of crude oil or condensate on a monthly basis. If the
results of the monthly determination show that the uncontrolled actual
VOC emission rate is greater than or equal to 4 tpy or the throughput
of crude oil or condensate is greater than 8,000 bbl or 2,000 bbl,
respectively, the owner or operator will have 30 days to switch to the
first option specified and control VOC emissions by at least 95 percent
continuously. We are proposing an exemption to the VOC emissions
control requirements for each emergency storage tank, provided the tank
meets the following requirements: (1) The tank is not used as an active
storage tank; (2) the owner or operator empties the tank no later than
15 days after receiving fluids; and (3) the tank is equipped with a
liquid level gauge or equivalent device.
    The proposed VOC emissions control applicability and requirements
are the same as or comparable on balance with the requirements in the
Utah Permitting Requirements and/or Utah Oil and Gas Rules. The
proposed methods for determining applicability to the control
requirements are the same as those determined to be cost-effective in
site-specific minor source BACT analyses in the Utah Permit
Requirements. In site-specific approval orders that have been issued,
the UDEQ requires VOC emissions controls for source-wide emissions from
storage tanks, glycol dehydrators, and pneumatic pumps at oil and
natural gas sources \115\ when the

source-wide uncontrolled actual emissions from that equipment are
greater than or equal to 4 tpy. We have also determined that
controlling emissions above the 4 tpy VOC level is cost-effective and
will achieve meaningful emissions reductions on the U&O
Reservation.\116\ The proposed methods for determining applicability to
the control requirements are comparable on balance with the UDEQ's
recently adopted Utah Oil and Gas Rules, with the exception that those
rules do not consider emissions from or control of pneumatic
pumps.\117\ The reason for this difference is discussed later when
describing requirements for pneumatic pumps. The Utah Oil and Gas Rules
require all storage vessels located at a well site that are in
operation as of January 1, 2018, with a site-wide throughput of 8,000
bbl or greater of crude oil or 2,000 bbl or greater of condensate per
year on a rolling 12-month basis to control emissions unless an
exemption applies that combined VOC emissions from storage vessels are
demonstrated to be less than 4 tpy of uncontrolled emissions (defined
as actual emissions or the potential to emit without considering
controls) on a rolling 12-month basis. Emissions to meet the exemption
must be calculated using direct site-specific sampling data and any
software program or calculation methodology in use by industry that is
based on AP-42 Chapter 7. The Utah Oil and Gas Rules require all new
and modified storage vessels (that begin operation on or after January
1, 2018) to control emissions upon startup of operation for a minimum
of one year. A separate provision allows controls to be removed after a
minimum of one year of operation if source-wide throughput is less than
8,000 bbl crude oil or 2,000 bbl condensate on a rolling 12-month basis
or uncontrolled VOC emissions are demonstrated to be less than 4 tons
per year. For sources that operate only storage tanks and not glycol
dehydrators or pneumatic pumps, the 8,000 bbl of crude oil/2,000 bbl of
condensate throughput applicability threshold for control of storage
tank emissions is the same as the control applicability threshold for
storage vessels in the UDEQ's recently adopted Utah Oil and Gas Rules.
The proposed requirement to control emissions from all new and modified
storage tanks for at least 12 consecutive months, the proposed
exemption for emergency storage tanks, and the provision allowing
removal of controls from storage tanks, glycol dehydrators and
pneumatic pumps are also the same as the requirements in the recently
adopted Utah Oil and Gas Rules, with the exception of pneumatic pump
emissions and control mentioned earlier that will be discussed in more
detail later.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \115\ The docket for this rule contains several examples of UDEQ
site-specific minor source NSR permits (approval orders) for Crude
Oil and Natural Gas Well Sites and/or Tank Batteries (DAQE-
AN151010001-15, DAQE-AN149250001-14, and DAQE-AN143640003-15). UDEQ
site-specific approval order requirements are based on BACT analyses
for oil and natural gas sources concluding that combustion of VOC
emissions from crude oil and condensate storage tanks, glycol
dehydrators, and pneumatic pumps is economically and technically
feasible when the source-wide uncontrolled VOC emissions from those
emissions sources is equal to or greater than 4 tpy. The analyses
rely in part on the EPA's analysis in the April 12, 2013 NSPS OOOO
reconsideration, and the finding that emissions from those three
emissions sources at a single source can feasibly be routed to the
same combustor. Though the 4 tpy threshold is not specifically
stated in the approval orders, if a source applying for a site-
specific approval order has source-wide storage tank, glycol
dehydrator, and pneumatic pump VOC emissions equal to or greater
than 4 tpy, the order contains requirements to control those
emissions.
    \116\ The RIA in the docket for this proposed U&O FIP contains
more detailed information on our analyses.
    \117\ In response to an EPA comment on UDEQ's proposal
questioning why issued approval orders and the GAO cover pneumatic
pumps, but the new Utah Oil and Gas Rules do not, the UDEQ stated
that the 2014 Uinta Basin Emissions Inventory indicated that
pneumatic pump emissions constitute an insignificant portion of the
total VOC emissions at Utah-regulated sources in the Basin. The
comments and UDEQ's responses are available in the docket for this
proposed rule (Docket ID No. EPA-R08-OAR-2015-0709).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are proposing to specify the option that the owner or operator
capture and route all subject emissions through a closed-vent system to
an enclosed combustor or utility flare that is designed and operated to
reduce the mass content of VOC in the emissions vented to it, by at
least 95.0 percent. Requirements for closed-vent systems are proposed
under conditions specified in Sec.  49.4176 (VOC emission control
requirements for covers and closed-vent systems) and requirements for
operation and monitoring of control devices are proposed under
conditions specified in Sec. Sec.  49.4177 (VOC Emission Control
Devices) and 49.4182 (Monitoring Requirements), all of which are
discussed in detail later in the summaries of Covers, Closed-Vent
Systems, and VOC Emission Control Devices and Monitoring Requirements.
    We are proposing the alternative option that the owner or operator
design their operations to recover 100 percent of the emissions and
recycle them for use in a process unit or incorporate them into a
product. These proposed control options are the same as the Utah Permit
Requirements and the Utah Oil and Gas Rules.
    This proposed U&O FIP approach for controlling pneumatic pumps by
routing emissions to the same control device that controls emissions
from storage tanks and glycol dehydrators is the same as the UDEQ's
approach for controlling pneumatic pumps in site-specific approval
orders issued under Utah Permit Requirements. As described earlier,
regulating pneumatic pumps in this proposed U&O FIP is not comparable
to the UDEQ's recently adopted new Utah Oil and Gas Rules because those
rules do not include requirements for pneumatic pumps.\118\ However, we
are confident that this approach will help achieve ozone air quality
improvements through this proposed U&O FIP, as the 2014 Uinta Basin
Emissions Inventory shows that VOC emissions from pneumatic pumps
constitute 15 percent of the total oil and natural gas-related VOC
emissions on the U&O Reservation.\119\ We are taking comment on whether
and how to control emissions from pneumatic pumps at oil and natural
gas sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \118\ We note that the recently adopted new Utah Oil and Gas
Rules do not contain requirements for pneumatic pumps. We are
proposing requirements for pneumatic pumps requirements, as we have
identified emissions from existing pneumatic pumps as being a
significant source of VOC emissions on the Indian country lands
within the U&O Reservation.
    \119\ By contrast, the 2014 Uinta Basin Emissions Inventory
shows that there are a very low number of pneumatic pumps installed
and operating on lands in the Uinta Basin that are regulated by the
UDEQ and the UDEQ has stated that this fact is the reason the Utah
Oil and Gas Rules do not have control requirements for pneumatic
pumps (see the response to comments on the UDEQ's proposed rules in
the docket for this rulemaking).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We do not expect that a substantial number of oil and natural gas
sources that would meet the applicability criteria of this proposed U&O
FIP will also be subject to NSPS OOOO or OOOOa, or to NESHAP HH.
However, to address any potential regulatory overlap, we are proposing
that any affected crude oil, condensate and produced water storage
tanks, glycol dehydrators and pneumatic pumps that are subject to the
emissions control requirements in the EPA standards, would not be
subject to this proposed U&O FIP requirements for such equipment and
activities, including monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting
requirements associated with such equipment and activities.
    We are seeking comment on these proposed requirements, including
information supporting alternative VOC emission reduction and control
efficiency requirements and specific operating condition requirements
that would provide equivalent protection of air quality in the Uinta
Basin and regulatory consistency across the Uinta Basin. We noted
previously that in January 2019, the Utah Air Quality Board approved an
additional rule in the Utah Administrative Code Chapter R307-500 Series
(Oil and Gas) at R307-

511 to manage associated gas from a completed oil well by either
routing it to a process unit for combustion, routing it to a sales
pipeline, or routing it to a VOC control device, except for emergency
release situations. This rule was approved after we drafted and
evaluated the emissions reductions and costs of the provisions in this
proposed U&O FIP. We intend to evaluate and incorporate equivalent
requirements for associated gas from oil wells in a final U&O FIP.
2. Covers, Closed-Vent Systems
    For affected new, modified, and existing sources that are required
to control emissions from storage tanks, glycol dehydrators and
pneumatic pumps, we are proposing in Sec.  49.4177 (VOC emission
control requirements for covers and closed-vent systems) to require the
use of covers on all crude oil, condensate, and produced water storage
tanks and the use of closed-vent systems with all equipment that
captures and routes VOC emissions to the respective vapor recovery or
VOC emission control devices. Because closed-vent systems would be
common to control requirements for storage tanks, glycol dehydrators
and pneumatic pumps, we are proposing these requirements in a separate
section to avoid redundancy. Proposed Sec.  49.4178 also specifies
construction and operational requirements for the covers and closed-
vent systems. The construction and operational requirements for the
covers and closed-vent systems are intended to provide legal and
practical enforceability to ensure that all captured VOC emissions are
routed to the respective vapor recovery or VOC emission control
devices. In addition, for affected new, modified, and existing sources
that are required to control emissions from storage tanks, glycol
dehydrators and pneumatic pumps, Sec.  49.4178 (VOC emission control
devices) we are proposing specific legally and practicably enforceable
construction and operational requirements for enclosed combustors and
utility flares.
    We are proposing in Sec.  49.4177 (VOC emission control
requirements for covers and closed-vent systems) to require that each
owner or operator equip the openings on each subject crude oil,
condensate, and produced water storage tank with a cover that ensures
that working, standing, breathing, and flashing losses are efficiently
routed through a closed-vent system to a vapor recovery system, an
enclosed combustor, or a utility flare. We are proposing that each
cover and all openings on the cover (e.g., access hatches, sampling
ports, and gauge wells) must form a continuous barrier over the entire
surface area of the crude oil, condensate, or produced water in the
storage tank. Each cover opening must be secured in a closed, sealed
position (i.e., covered by a gasketed lid or cap) whenever material is
in the tank on which the cover is installed, except when it is
necessary to use an opening to: (1) Add material to, or remove material
from the unit (this includes openings necessary to equalize or balance
the internal pressure of the unit following changes in the level of the
material in the unit); (2) inspect or sample the material in the unit;
or (3) inspect, maintain, repair, or replace equipment inside the unit.
    We are proposing to require that each owner or operator subject to
this requirement to control VOC emissions from working, standing,
breathing, and flashing losses from crude oil, condensate, and produced
water storage tanks, glycol dehydrator still vents, and pneumatic pumps
must use closed-vent systems to collect and route the emissions to the
respective vapor recovery or VOC emission control devices. We are
proposing that all vent lines, connections, fittings, valves, relief
valves, and any other appurtenance employed to contain and collect
emissions and transport them to the vapor recovery or VOC control
equipment, must be maintained and operated properly during any time the
control equipment is operating and must be designed to operate with no
detectable emissions. If a closed-vent system contains one or more
bypass devices that could be used to divert all or a portion of the
emissions from entering the vapor recovery or VOC control devices, we
are proposing that the owner or operator must meet one of the following
options for each bypass device: (1) At the inlet to the bypass device,
properly install, calibrate, maintain, and operate a flow indicator
capable of taking periodic readings and sounding an alarm when the
bypass device is open such that the emissions are being, or could be,
diverted away from the control device and into the atmosphere; or (2)
secure the bypass device valve in the non-diverting position using a
car-seal or a lock-and-key type configuration.
    The proposed cover and closed-vent system requirements are
comparable on balance with UDEQ requirements for storage vessels in
both the issued site-specific approval orders and the Utah Oil and Gas
Rules. The site-specific approval orders require storage tank thief
hatches to be closed and latched except during tank unloading or other
maintenance activities. They also require that thief hatches be
inspected once every three months to ensure thief hatches are closed,
latched, and the associated gaskets, if any, are in good working
condition. Similarly, the Utah Oil and Gas Rules for storage vessels
require thief hatches to be kept closed and latched except during
unloading or maintenance. This proposed U&O FIP requirements for covers
and closed-vent systems, including the associated monitoring
requirements proposed in Sec.  49.4183 and discussed later, were
developed by consulting the covers and closed-vent system requirements
of EPA standards, such as OOOO and NESHAP HH. For ease of
implementation, these requirements provide more detail than the UDEQ
requirements in both the issued site-specific approval orders and the
Utah Oil and Gas Rules but are comparable on balance with the UDEQ
requirements for storage vessels and closed-vent systems.
3. VOC Emission Control Devices
    For new, modified and existing sources that are required to control
emissions from storage tanks, glycol dehydrators and pneumatic pumps,
we are proposing to require in Sec.  49.4178 (VOC emission control
devices) that each owner or operator follow the manufacturer's written
operating instructions, procedures and maintenance schedules to ensure
the use of good air pollution control practices for minimizing
emissions from each enclosed combustor and utility flare. Each utility
flare must be designed and operated according to the requirements of 40
CFR 60.18(b). Each enclosed combustor must be designed and operated to
reduce the mass content of the VOC in the natural gas routed to it by
at least 95 percent continuously. The proposed control efficiency
required for each VOC emissions control device is the same as the
recently adopted Utah Oil and Gas Rules.
    We recognize that the site-specific approval orders issued to
existing sources under the Utah Permit Requirements require control
devices to meet 98 percent VOC control efficiency. But we have
concluded that the differences between this proposed U&O FIP and the
Utah Oil and Gas Rules and the Utah Permit Requirements are minimal,
and all were designed to achieve a consistent result. The UDEQ requires
permittees of minor oil and natural gas sources to show compliance with
98.0 percent VOC control device control efficiency by routing all
exhaust gas/vapors (from the storage tanks, glycol dehydrators or
pneumatic pumps) to the operating combustor,

operating the device according to the manufacturer's written
instructions when gases/vapors are routed to it, operating the device
with no visible emissions, and by performing tests to visually
determine smoke emissions according to EPA Method 22 at 40 CFR part 60,
appendix A. The recently adopted new Utah Oil and Gas Rules require at
least 95.0 percent VOC control efficiency and do not specify methods to
ensure no visible emissions but refer to NSPS OOOOa for demonstrating
compliance with the control efficiency requirements. We note that
combustion devices can be designed to meet 98.0 percent control
efficiencies, and can control emissions by 98.0 percent or more, on
average, in practice when properly operated.\120\ Combustion devices
designed to meet 98.0 percent control efficiency may not, however, be
able continuously to meet this efficiency in practice, due to factors
such as the variability of field conditions and downtime.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \120\ The EPA has currently reviewed performance tests submitted
for 19 different makes/models of combustor control devices and
confirmed they meet the performance requirements in NSPS subpart
OOOO and NESHAP subparts HH and HHH. All reported control
efficiencies were above 99.9 percent at tested conditions. EPA notes
that the control efficiency achieved in the field is likely to be
lower than the control efficiency achieved at a bench test site
under controlled conditions, but these units should have no problem
meeting 95.0 percent control continuously. See Combustion Device
Performance Testing Summary Table in the docket for this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    During development of NSPS OOOO and OOOOa, 95.0 percent control
efficiency was determined to be the best system of emission reduction
(BSER) and able to be continuously achieved by affected facilities
(e.g., storage vessels, centrifugal compressors) nationwide, although
the EPA is aware that combustors and utility flares may be capable of
achieving instantaneous control efficiencies greater than 95.0
percent.\121\ In determining BSER, the EPA must be confident that the
control efficiency can be achieved continuously by every affected
facility nationwide to which it applies. We are confident that
combustors and utility flares can meet at least 95.0 percent VOC
control efficiency on a continuous basis. While the EPA is aware that
combustion devices commonly used to control VOC-containing gas streams
are capable of demonstrating greater than 98.0 percent continuous VOC
control efficiency in a controlled performance testing environment,
under ideal conditions, based on widespread and readily available
manufacturer test data,\122\ we are not confident that the devices can
meet 98.0 percent continuous VOC control efficiency in the field.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \121\ See ``Oil and Natural Gas Sector New Source Performance
Standards and National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air
Pollutants reviews, Parts 60 and 63, Response to Public Comments on
Proposed Rule, See 76 FR 52738 (August 23, 2011), available at
http://www.regulations.gov (Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505 (Section
2.5.4, pages 127-128; Section 3.4.1, pages 294-295; and Section
3.5.1, pages 302-303)).
    \122\ See Combustion Device Performance Testing Summary Table in
the docket for this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are proposing to require that all utility flares and enclosed
combustors installed per this rule are models that: (1) Have been
tested by the manufacturer in accordance with specific requirements in
NSPS OOOO; (2) are devices that are designed and operated in accordance
with applicable requirements in 40 CFR 60.18(b), or (3) are devices for
which the owner or operator has conducted performance testing according
to the specific requirements in NSPS OOOO. The Utah Oil and Gas Rules
require that compliance for VOC control devices be demonstrated by
meeting the performance test methods and procedures specified in NSPS
OOOO. The Utah Oil and Gas Rules do not distinguish between utility
flares and enclosed combustors. We determined it was important to
propose specific requirements for the different types of control
devices that may be present at oil and natural gas sources on the U&O
Reservation, because EPA standards, such as NSPS OOOO and OOOOa and
NESHAP HH make such distinctions for legal and practical
enforceability. Therefore, although the proposed requirements for VOC
control devices to demonstrate compliance with the proposed control
efficiency requirements are more detailed for ease implementation, they
are comparable on balance with the Utah Oil and Gas Rules that
reference such requirements in NSPS OOOO.
    We have determined that certain work practice and operational
requirements are also necessary for the practical enforceability of the
proposed VOC emission reduction requirements for utility flares or
enclosed combustors. We are proposing that utility flares and enclosed
combustors must be operated within specific parameters to ensure the
effective control of VOC emissions. (This necessity was discussed in
detail in the preamble and Technical Support Documents to the proposed
and final NSPS OOOO).\123\ Specifically, we are proposing that each
owner or operator must ensure that each enclosed combustor or utility
flare is: (1) Operated at all times that emissions are routed to it;
(2) equipped and operated with a liquid knock-out system to collect any
condensable vapors (to prevent liquids from going through the control
device); (3) equipped and operated with a flash-back flame arrestor;
(4) equipped and operated with a continuous burning pilot flame, or an
electronically controlled automatic ignition device; (5) equipped with
a monitoring system for continuous recording of the parameters that
indicate proper operation of each continuous burning pilot flame or
electronically controlled automatic ignition device, such as a chart
recorder, data logger or similar device, or connected to a Supervisory
Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system, to monitor and document
proper operation of the enclosed combustor or utility flare; (6)
maintained in a leak-free condition; and (7) operated with no visible
smoke emissions. These proposed work practice and operational
requirements are the same as the Utah Oil and Gas Rules with respect to
operation of the control devices with no visible emissions. Other
proposed work practice and operational requirements are different or
more prescriptive than the Utah Oil and Gas Rules in several areas, to
provide legal and practical enforceability. For example, the Utah Oil
and Gas Rules require all VOC emissions control devices to simply be
equipped and operated with an operational auto igniter. This proposed
U&O FIP requires each enclosed combustor or utility flare to be
equipped and operated with either: (1) A continuous burning pilot
flame; or (2) an electronically controlled automatic ignition device.
All enclosed combustors or utility flares must be equipped with a
monitoring system for continuous measurement and recording of the
parameters that indicate proper operation of each continuous burning
pilot flame or electronically controlled automatic ignition device,
such as a chart recorder, data logger or similar device, or connected
to a SCADA system to monitor and document proper operation of the
device. The work practice and operational requirements for VOC control
devices in this proposed U&O FIP were developed by considering the UDEQ
requirements for VOC control devices in combination with consulting the
work practice and operational requirements for control devices in EPA
standards, including NSPS OOOO and OOOOa and NESHAP HH. Specifically
regarding the proposed requirement to equip enclosed combustors and
utility flares with either

a continuous burning pilot flame or an electronically controlled
automatic ignition device, provided there is a monitoring system to
indicate proper operation of the device, the EPA has maintained our
position as recently as 2016 that without a continuous ignition
sources, there may be periods of uncontrolled emissions and continuous
ignition sources are designed to combust the flammable portion of the
gas stream, even if the gas stream has a low BTU content.\124\
Therefore, we have maintained that automatic ignition devices may not
be reliable in the field to ensure that there is an ignition source at
all times gas is flowing to a control device, and EPA standards, such
as NSPS OOOO and OOOOa have commonly required that enclosed combustors
be equipped with continuous burning pilot flames and continuous
parameter monitoring systems to ensure the presence of a flame at all
times a gas stream is routed to the control device. Additionally, since
Sec.  60.18(b)(2) of the General Provisions for 40 CFR part 60 is
required for design and operation if an operator uses a utility flare
under this proposed U&O FIP, a continuous pilot flame is required in
that provision, and we believe an equivalent requirement should be
applicable to the enclosed combustion control devices typically used
for controlling emissions from storage vessels and other equipment at
oil and natural gas sources. We recognize that the UDEQ requires auto
igniters on all combustion devices. In the interest of establishing
regulations on the U&O Reservation that are comparable on balance with
the UDEQ requirements, we are proposing a hybrid approach that provides
owners and operators required to control of VOC emissions from storage
tanks, glycol dehydrators and pneumatic pumps the option to use devices
that comply with EPA standards (continuous burning pilot), or to use
electronically controlled automatic ignition devices if the control
device is also equipped with a system that can indicate to the owner
and operator that the automatic ignition device is not operating
properly while gas is being routed to the control device. We expect
that these proposed requirements for control devices would achieve a
comparable result as the requirements for VOC control devices in the
Utah Oil and Gas Rules, ensuring the control device is operated
properly to achieve the required control efficiency, while providing
consistency with EPA policy regarding flares and combustors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \123\ These documents can be found in the docket for the NSPS
OOOO rulemaking, Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505, available at http://www.regulations.gov.
    \124\ EPA's Response to Public Comments on the EPA's Oil and
Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New, Reconstructed, and
Modified Sources. 40 CFR part 60, subpart OOOOa. May 2016. Chapter
11--Compliance. Comment Excerpt Number: 17. Pages 188-191. Available
at https://www.regulations.gov (Docket ID EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0505-
7632), Accessed August 16, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 49.4178 proposes to allow owners or operators of oil and
natural gas sources, upon receiving written approval, to use control
devices other than an enclosed combustor or utility flare, provided
they achieve at least 95.0 percent VOC control efficiency continuously.
This provision will allow for owners or operators to take advantage of
technological advances in VOC emission control for the oil and natural
gas industry and will provide us with valuable information on any new
control technologies.
    We are seeking comment on the covers, closed-vent systems, and VOC
emission control devices provisions in this proposed U&O FIP, including
information supporting more or less stringent requirements that would
provide legal and practical enforceability of the proposed requirement
to reduce VOC emissions from storage tanks, glycol dehydrators, and
pneumatic pumps by 95.0 percent continuously.
4. Fugitive Emissions Control
    For new, modified and existing sources, we are proposing LDAR
requirements in Sec.  49.4179 (Fugitive Emissions VOC Emission Control
Requirements) that each owner or operator of an oil and natural gas
source that is required to control VOC emissions from storage tanks,
glycol dehydrators, and pneumatic pumps per Sec. Sec.  49.4174 through
49.4178 conduct periodic inspections of the source to detect leaks from
fugitive emission components and repair them. We are proposing to
define fugitive emissions components in Sec.  49.4171 to include, among
other things: Valves, connectors, open-ended lines, pressure relief
devices, flanges, covers, closed-vent systems, and thief hatches or
other openings on controlled tanks. Each affected owner or operator
will be required to develop and implement a Reservation-wide fugitive
emissions monitoring plan for all of its oil and natural gas sources on
the U&O Reservation that must include the following requirements: (1)
Conduct an initial monitoring of fugitive emissions components at each
affected source within 18 months of the effective date of the rule; (2)
conduct subsequent monitoring once every 6 months after the initial
monitoring for fugitive emissions components at oil and natural gas
sources; (3) describe the fugitive emissions detection monitoring
method to be used, which is limited to onsite optical gas imaging
instruments, EPA Reference Method 21, with a leak defined as any
visible emissions using an optical gas imaging instrument, or an
instrument reading of 500 parts per million volume (ppmv) VOC using EPA
Reference Method 21, or another method approved by the EPA other than
optical gas imaging or EPA Reference Method 21; (4) identification of
manufacturer and model number of any leak detection equipment to be
used; (5) procedures and timeframes for identifying and repairing
components from which leaks are detected, including a requirement to
repair any identified leaks from components that are safe to repair and
that do not require source shutdown within 30 days of identifying a
leak; (6) identification of timeframes to repair leaks that are
technically infeasible to repair (i.e., are unsafe to repair \125\ or
require source shutdown), but no later than 2 years after discovering
such a leak; (7) procedures for verifying effective repair of leaking
components, no later than 30 days after repairing a leak; (8) specific
training and experience needed to perform inspections; (9) description
of procedures for calibration and maintenance of monitoring equipment
to be used; and (10) standard monitoring protocol for a typical
affected source, including a general list of component types that will
be inspected and what supporting data will be recorded (e.g., wind
speed, detection method device-specific operational parameters, date,
time, and duration of inspection). We are proposing in Sec.  49.4179 to
exempt source owners/operators from having to monitor certain
components for various reasons, such as: (1) The monitoring could not
occur without elevating the monitoring personnel which expose the
personnel to other immediate danger; or (2) the component to be
inspected is buried, insulated, or otherwise obstructed in a manner
that prevents access by a monitor probe or optical gas imaging device.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \125\ Unsafe to repair is defined in the proposed rule as
meaning that operator personnel would be exposed to an imminent or
potential danger as a consequence of the attempt to repair the leak
during normal operation of the source.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In drafting the proposed LDAR requirements, we reviewed the UDEQ
requirements. For new and modified oil and natural gas sources that may
have obtained coverage under the UDEQ's GAO, we have concluded that the
UDEQ's LDAR inspection frequency requirement is different than the LDAR
inspection frequency requirements for

oil and natural gas sources under this proposed U&O FIP. For new and
modified sources under the GAO, the UDEQ requires an inspection
frequency based on production levels and number of leaks detected,
which may require monitoring frequencies for only certain sources that
are equivalent to this proposed U&O FIP. For existing sources covered
under site-specific approval orders, we have concluded that the UDEQ's
LDAR frequency requirements (a range of annual to quarterly) to be
different than those in proposed FIP. For new, modified and existing
sources subject to the recently adopted new Utah Oil and Gas Rules, the
LDAR frequency requirements of this proposed U&O FIP are the same. The
LDAR requirements in the Utah Oil and Gas Rules were designed
procedurally to be consistent with NSPS OOOOa, though the applicability
threshold is different. The UDEQ's site-specific approval orders, the
GAO, and the recently adopted new Utah Oil and Gas Rules all require
implementation of an LDAR program at facilities that are required to
control storage vessel, dehydrator and/or pneumatic pump emissions,
which is consistent with this proposed U&O FIP. We determined that,
particularly for existing sources, in order to provide consistent
requirements across the Uinta Basin, the LDAR requirements in this
proposed U&O FIP should be consistent with the LDAR requirements for
new, modified and existing sources in the Utah Oil and Gas Rules, as
those rules apply prospectively to all oil and natural gas well sites
on non-reservation Indian country lands in the Uinta Basin that are not
already subject to site-specific approval orders. If the sources in the
Uinta Basin that are regulated by the UDEQ are also subject to the LDAR
requirements of the NSPS OOOOa, the NSPS requirements supersede the
UDEQ requirements. Similarly, if the sources in the Uinta Basin that
would be regulated by the EPA on the U&O Reservation are subject to the
LDAR requirements of the NSPS OOOOa, those sources would be exempt from
complying with the LDAR requirements in this proposed U&O FIP. The
fugitive emissions LDAR procedural requirements proposed in this
proposed U&O FIP are consistent with the Utah Oil and Gas Rules. We are
proposing applicability criteria for implementing an LDAR program, and
LDAR inspection frequency requirements, that are consistent with
requirements in the Utah Oil and Gas Rules, which meets our goal of
regulatory consistency across the Uinta Basin. We expect that the
proposed LDAR requirements will result in meaningful reductions in VOC
emissions and ground-level ozone production, significantly furthering
our main objective for this proposed U&O FIP. We are seeking comment on
the fugitive emissions control requirements in this proposed U&O FIP,
including information supporting more or less stringent inspection
requirements.
    We are proposing a provision allowing for the use of alternative
methods of leak detection, other than EPA Reference Method 21 or
optical gas imaging instrument, to demonstrate compliance with the
fugitive emissions monitoring requirements, provided the method is
approved by the EPA. The Uinta Basin generally encompasses an area of
over 6,800 square miles with hundreds of miles of dirt roads connecting
over 10,000 oil and natural gas wells. According to the 2014 Uinta
Basin Emissions Inventory,\126\ the average number of wells per well
pad is 1.3. The inventory shows that fugitive emissions are the second
highest VOC emissions source on the U&O Reservation, at about 13,900
tpy. The total does not account for emissions due to abnormal process
operations, which is discussed in the following paragraphs. Recognizing
that technology used to detect, measure, and mitigate emissions is
rapidly developing, on July 18, 2016, the EPA issued a request for
information, (RFI) \127\ inviting all parties to provide information on
innovative technologies to accurately detect, measure, and mitigate
emissions from the oil and natural gas industry. The intent of this
notice was to solicit data supporting alternative approaches to limit
emissions from this sector.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \126\ The complete, detailed dataset for the 2014 Uinta Basin
Emission Inventory, including location data of every facility, can
be viewed in the docket for this rule (Docket ID No. EPA-R08-OAR-
2015-0709), SQLite database titled OGEI_v2.2_2014FINAL.db''.
    \127\ See 81 FR 46670 (July 18, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Studies have been conducted specific to the Uinta Basin that
investigated the viability of leak detection from an aerial platform.
One study \128\ employed a helicopter-based infrared camera, at an
elevation of approximately 50 meters above ground level, to survey more
than 8,000 oil and natural gas well pads in seven U.S. basins to assess
the prevalence and distribution of hydrocarbon sources whose fugitive
emissions were high enough to be labeled high-emitters. At each site
with detected emissions, the survey team reported the site's location
and the number and equipment type of each observed emission source.
Survey results indicated the prevalence of high-emitting sites was four
percent of all the sites surveyed across the seven basins examined. In
the Uinta Basin, 1,389 well pad facilities were flown over, and high
emissions were observed at 6.6 percent of those well pads.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \128\ ``Aerial Surveys of Elevated Hydrocarbon Emissions from
Oil and Gas Production Sites,'' Environmental Science and
Technology, 2016, 50 (9), pp 4877-4886, publication date April 5,
2016, available at http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acs.est.6b00705, accessed August 16, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The high emitting sources, or ``super-emitters,'' are likely due to
abnormal process conditions.\129\ Examples of abnormal process
conditions, which could be persistent or episodic, include: Failures of
tank control systems, malfunctions upstream of the point of emissions
(for example, stuck separator dump valve resulting in produced gas
venting from tanks), design failures (for example, vortexing or gas
entrainment during separator liquid dumps) and equipment or process
issues (for example, over-pressured separators, malfunctioning or
improperly operated dehydrators or compressors).\130\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \129\ Zavala-Araiza, D., Alvarez, R.A., Lyon, D.R., Allen, D.T.,
Marchese, A.J., Zimmerle, D.J., & Hamburg, S.P. (2017). Super-
emitters in natural gas infrastructure are caused by abnormal
process conditions. Nature communications, 8, 14012.
    \130\ The 2014 Uinta Basin Emissions Inventory has not accounted
for the phenomenon of ``super-emitters.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are seeking information on alternative methods of leak detection
(e.g., aerial) that could potentially achieve meaningful and more cost-
effective reductions in fugitive VOC emissions that contribute to ozone
formation. We are seeking input on how these advanced monitoring
technologies and platforms could be broadly applied to new, modified
and existing sources in the Uinta Basin and whether any of these
advanced monitoring technologies would be effective in the Uinta Basin
and should be approvable as an alternative leak detection compliance
method under a final U&O FIP. We are also seeking input on the criteria
that EPA should consider in approving alternative leak detection
compliance methods, including appropriate accuracy and quality
assurance standards that alternative methods would need to meet to
demonstrate equivalency to onsite optical gas imaging instruments or
onsite EPA Reference Method 21. Specific descriptions of the approach,
frequency of monitoring, detection thresholds, limiting factors in
detection, costs and availability for alternative leak detection
methods would be helpful.

5. VOC Emissions Control Requirements for All Sources
    Sections 49.4180 (VOC emission control requirements for Tank Truck
Loading), 49.4180 (VOC emission control requirements for pneumatic
controllers) and 49.4184 (Other combustion devices) contain proposed
requirements for all new, modified and existing oil and natural gas
sources, regardless of source-wide or emission unit specific emissions.
Like the requirements in Utah's Oil and Gas Rules for oil and natural
gas sources in UDEQ's jurisdiction, this proposed U&O FIP's
requirements are as follows: (1) Tank trucks used for transporting
intermediate crude oil, condensate, or produced water must be loaded
using bottom filling or submerged fill pipes; (2) all existing
pneumatic controllers must meet the pneumatic controller standards in
NSPS OOOO at 40 CFR 60.5390(b)(2) and (c)(2) and NSPS OOOOa at 40 CFR
60.5390a(b)(2) and (c)(2); and (3) all existing enclosed combustors,
utility flares, or other open flares present at sources on a voluntary
basis that are not required to control storage tank, glycol and
dehydrator and pneumatic pump emissions (per Sec. Sec.  49.4174 through
49.4178), and are voluntarily operated, must be equipped with an
electronically controlled automatic ignition device.
    Our proposed requirements for truck loading/unloading diverge in
one respect from what the UDEQ is requiring in their recently adopted
rulemaking. The UDEQ requires that VOC emissions from tank truck
loading and unloading at sources required to control storage tank
emissions be captured using a vapor capture line and routed to the
onsite combustor or a separate combustor for VOC control. We are not
proposing an equivalent requirement, as we have determined that it may
not be cost effective presently given limited estimated emissions for
truck loading/unloading on the U&O Reservation, based on the 2014 Uinta