In Anti-Regulation Push, Congress Set to Stamp Out Gas-Waste Rule

Advocates say it would bring in more money for the country and companies, but industry wants it gone.

FILE - In this June 25, 2012 file photo, a crew works on a gas drilling rig at a well site for shale based natural gas in Zelienople, Pa. With two months left in President Barack Obama’s term, his administration issued a rule Tuesday, Nov. 15, 2016, intended to clamp down on oil companies that burn off natural gas on public lands.
AP Photo/Keith Srakocic
Jason Plautz
Add to Briefcase
Jason Plautz
Feb. 2, 2017, 8 p.m.

In a cam­paign to over­turn Obama-era reg­u­la­tions, con­gres­sion­al Re­pub­lic­ans are wad­ing in­to the battle over how to make nat­ur­al gas-drilling clean­er for the en­vir­on­ment.

The House is set to vote Fri­day on a res­ol­u­tion to dis­ap­prove of a Bur­eau of Land Man­age­ment rule to lim­it the amount of meth­ane be­ing re­leased in­ten­tion­ally or ac­ci­dent­ally from gas pro­duc­tion on fed­er­al lands. The rule, fi­nal­ized in Decem­ber, seeks to lower the rate that gas is ven­ted or burned off.

The Sen­ate has not an­nounced when it would bring up the res­ol­u­tion, one of sev­er­al to over­turn reg­u­la­tions fi­nal­ized in the fi­nal months of the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion. The Sen­ate is fit­ting their res­ol­u­tions in between votes on Cab­in­et nom­in­ees, in­clud­ing an up­com­ing vote on a res­ol­u­tion over­turn­ing a rule re­quir­ing dis­clos­ure of oil-com­pany pay­ments to for­eign gov­ern­ments. Thir­teen Sen­ate Re­pub­lic­ans co­sponsored the up­per cham­ber’s res­ol­u­tion, which is ex­pec­ted to pass.

Meth­ane, a byproduct of nat­ur­al gas, is a power­ful green­house gas that traps about 25 times as much heat as car­bon di­ox­ide. The Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion has worked to cut meth­ane emis­sions amid the frack­ing boom, in­clud­ing an agree­ment with Canada to cut emis­sions from the oil-and-gas sec­tor by 40 to 45 per­cent of 2012 levels by 2025 (un­der the Trump White House, it’s un­likely that ac­tion would con­tin­ue in earn­est).

The BLM rule was meant to ad­dress a spe­cif­ic source of meth­ane emis­sions, when com­pan­ies will either re­lease or burn off ex­cess gas when there’s not suf­fi­cient in­fra­struc­ture to get it to the mar­ket. The rule — which only ap­plies to wells on fed­er­al land — also asks man­u­fac­tur­ers to look for and re­place leaks in pipelines and throughout the ex­trac­tion pro­cess.

A 2010 Gov­ern­ment Ac­count­ab­il­ity Of­fice re­port found that some 40 per­cent of the gas be­ing re­leased from fed­er­al lands was cap­tur­able, and could in­crease fed­er­al roy­alty pay­ments by $23 mil­lion a year. All told, 462 bil­lion cu­bic feet of nat­ur­al gas were lost between 2009 and 2015, ac­cord­ing to fed­er­al es­tim­ates, enough to power 6 mil­lion homes a year.

A 2015 ana­lys­is by the En­vir­on­ment­al De­fense Fund es­tim­ated that the equi­val­ent of more than $300 mil­lion in gas was lost from fed­er­al and tri­bal lands every year.

In a hear­ing Wed­nes­day that fea­tured Amer­ic­an Pet­ro­leum In­sti­tute pres­id­ent Jack Ger­ard, Sen. Tom Ud­all pushed back on the “ag­gress­ive in­dustry lob­by­ing cam­paign to do away with BLM’s meth­ane rule.”

“But re­peal does not hold up un­der scru­tiny, if the pub­lic in­terest is con­sidered,” Ud­all said. “Eras­ing this rule would res­ult in waste of tax­pay­er re­sources and dol­lars, hinder job growth in a new and grow­ing sec­tor, and pose a pub­lic-health haz­ard.”

Crit­ics have said that BLM’s ef­forts to lim­it the emis­sions were too re­strict­ive and costly, even con­sid­er­ing the po­ten­tial sav­ings. API has ar­gued that re­stric­tions like this were con­trib­ut­ing to a years-long down­turn on drilling on fed­er­al land, and that the cost of in­stalling new tech­no­logy and re­port­ing leaks out­weighs the po­ten­tial be­ne­fits.

Scott Kid­well, vice pres­id­ent of gov­ern­ment af­fairs for the drill­er Concho Re­sources, said in a let­ter to Bish­op that the rule “would dis­rupt ex­ist­ing oil and gas op­er­a­tions and de­ter in­vest­ment in new ex­plor­a­tion and de­vel­op­ment, jeop­ard­iz­ing cur­rent jobs, im­ped­ing new hir­ing, and re­du­cing vi­tally needed eco­nom­ic activ­ity and tax rev­en­ues.”

Sen­ate En­vir­on­ment and Pub­lic Works chair­man John Bar­rasso said BLM “should use its lim­ited re­sources to per­mit nat­ur­al-gas pipelines on fed­er­al lands in a timely man­ner,” rather than work­ing on meth­ane.

But the broad scope of the CRA means that the In­teri­or De­part­ment would not have the au­thor­ity to is­sue an equi­val­ent rule without con­gres­sion­al ap­prov­al. Even with EPA rules on meth­ane emis­sions (al­though EPA only fi­nal­ized rules for new and mod­i­fied wells, not ex­ist­ing ones, and the agency could un­wind those reg­u­la­tions un­der Trump) and some ac­tion on state level, sup­port­ers say the loss of any BLM ac­tion would be too drastic.

“The prob­lem with a CRA is that it’s a sledge­ham­mer,” said Mark Brown­stein, vice pres­id­ent for EDF’s Cli­mate & En­ergy Pro­gram. “If Con­gress and the new ad­min­is­tra­tion want to help states lead, a bet­ter ap­proach would be to work with the ex­ist­ing BLM policy frame­work and per­haps make modi­fic­a­tions that would ease the syn­chron­iz­a­tion of state and fed­er­al policies—giv­ing states the op­por­tun­ity and in­cent­ives to lead, and provid­ing a fed­er­al back­stop when they don’t.”

The BLM rules were meant to mir­ror ones set up in Col­or­ado (which lacks a rule on flar­ing) and Wyom­ing; and Cali­for­nia is poised to in­sti­tute a com­par­able rule on leaks and vent­ing, so com­pan­ies in those drilling-rich states are already set to deal with waste rules. Al­ex­an­dra Teitz, a former policy ana­lyst for BLM who worked on the rule be­fore leav­ing the agency in Janu­ary, told a pan­el of House Demo­crats this week that the agency tried to ease in its lim­its and con­sider ex­ist­ing state rules in writ­ing its own reg­u­la­tions.

But as Con­gress flexes the CRA for the first time since 2001, stake­hold­ers are warn­ing that it may be too ex­treme for rules like this, es­pe­cially giv­en that it would seem to stomp out BLM’s work on simple meth­ane leaks.

“The CRA is touted as a tool for Con­gress to ex­ert con­trol over un­au­thor­ized, un­ne­ces­sary, or un­reas­on­able agency reg­u­la­tion,” Teitz said. “The Waste Pre­ven­tion Rule is none of these.”

What We're Following See More »
Two of Trump’s Top Advisors Feuding
5 minutes ago

"A long-simmering feud between two of President Trump’s top advisers reached a boiling point Thursday, as White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci publicly insinuated that chief of staff Reince Priebus is a leaker."

Trump Admin Threatens Alaska
51 minutes ago

"President Donald Trump isn't going to just let go of Sen. Lisa Murkowski's no vote on Tuesday's health care. Early Wednesday, Trump took to Twitter to express displeasure with Murkowski's vote. By that afternoon, each of Alaska's two Republican senators had received a phone call from Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke letting them know the vote had put Alaska's future with the administration in jeopardy."

Trump Names Brownback Ambassador at Large
2 hours ago

President Trump has nominated Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback to be ambassador at large for international religious freedom at the Department of State. Governor since 2011, Brownback worked on religious freedom issues while a U.S. senator from 1996 to 2011.

More Sanctions, This Time on Venezuela
2 hours ago

"The Treasury Department imposed financial sanctions on a host of current and former senior Venezuelan officials on Wednesday and threatened to take more stringent action if President Nicolás Maduro proceeds with plans for a constituent assembly on Sunday that critics consider a danger to democracy."

LGBT Groups Threaten to Sue Trump Over Trans Ban
2 hours ago

LGBT groups are unsure how literally to take President Trump's tweet on Wednesday that he wants to ban transgender persons from the military, or whether it will be followed up by an official order. But if so, groups like Lambda Legal and the American Civil Liberties Union "are ready to take legal action."


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.