[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 98 (Monday, May 20, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 25147-25149]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-12544]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
30 CFR Part 250
RIN 1010-AB96
Flaring or Venting Gas and Burning Liquid Hydrocarbons
AGENCY: Minerals Management Service (MMS), Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule amends regulations governing restrictions on flaring
or venting gas to include restrictions on burning liquid hydrocarbons.
MMS made this amendment to clarify that burning liquid hydrocarbons is
allowable only under certain circumstances as approved by the Regional
Supervisor.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is effective on June 19, 1996.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sharon Buffington, Engineering and Standards Branch, telephone (703)
787-1600.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On February 17, 1995, MMS published a rule
in the Federal Register (60 FR 9312) that proposed to amend the
requirements at 30 CFR 250.175, flaring and venting of gas, to include
burning liquid hydrocarbons. This rule is necessary because requests to
burn liquid hydrocarbons are increasing, and we determined that we
needed to provide regulatory guidance on burning.
Response to Comments
During the 60-day comment period, MMS received eight comments,
predominately from the oil and gas industry. MMS appreciates the
suggestions and comments that we received. We reviewed all of the
comments, and in some instances, we revised the final language based on
these comments. MMS grouped the comments by the following major issues:
1. In Sec. 250.175(c), MMS proposed that the Regional Supervisor
allow a lessee to burn a ``minimal'' amount of liquid hydrocarbons with
prior approval. Several comments suggested that MMS determine the
absolute value of ``minimal.'' One comment suggested that we create a
table of allowable burn amounts by using distance from shore as the
determining factor. In general, the comments said that the term
``minimal'' is not specific enough.
Response
MMS agrees that, if possible, using an absolute value for the term
``minimal'' would be desirable. However, we feel that it is impractical
to determine an solute value because it depends on many economic,
technical, safety, and environmental factors. Therefore, an amount that
may be prudent to burn in one area may not be acceptable to burn in
another correlative area. Conserving natural resources is a major
consideration in burning liquid hydrocarbons. However, our
determination of the allowable ``minimal'' amount that you can burn
will also depend on technical, safety, and environmental factors.
2. Several comments suggested that storing and transporting or re-
injecting liquid hydrocarbons poses a greater risk than burning them.
Response
MMS agrees that in some cases the alternatives to burning liquid
hydrocarbons may be risky to the environment or personnel. That is the
reason MMS provided the option of showing the Regional Supervisor that
the alternatives are infeasible or pose significant risk. MMS will
evaluate the information that you supply concerning the risks of the
alternatives case by case. Please be assured that the Regional
Supervisor will evaluate your requests to burn hydrocarbons fairly and
promptly by using the information that you supply in your requests.
3. Section 250.175(c)--One comment suggested that MMS rewrite the
first sentence of paragraph (c) because the phrase ``lessees must not
burn liquid hydrocarbons'' may portray a negative bias against burning
liquid hydrocarbons.
Response
MMS did not intend to portray a negative bias against burning
liquid hydrocarbons. Our intent was only to set boundaries on burning
liquid hydrocarbons. However, to avoid any confusion, MMS will restate
the first sentence of paragraph (c) to say that ``Lessees may burn
produced liquid hydrocarbons only if the Regional Supervisor
approves.''
4. Section 250.175(a)(3)--Several comments opposed MMS's changing
the limit on flaring, without prior approval, during well evaluations
and cleaning, to 48 cumulative hours (from 48 continuous hours). The
individuals felt that 48 cumulative hours are not always sufficient
(especially in deep water). Similarly, one comment recommended that MMS
state that the Regional Supervisor has the authority to increase the
flaring limit.
Response
MMS feels that, for environmental and conservation reasons, it
needs to change the term ``continuous'' to ``cumulative'' for flaring
during well evaluations and cleaning operations (without prior
approval). Otherwise, the term ``continuous'' would permit multiple
flarings of up to 48 hours each simply by having a shut-in period
between flarings.
MMS realizes that 48 hours of flaring will not always meet well
testing needs. For these occasions, the Regional Supervisor has the
authority to increase the flaring limit. MMS will continue to evaluate
requests for more than 48 cumulative hours of flaring during well
evaluations or cleaning. However, without prior approval, MMS will only
allow 48 cumulative hours per testing operation on a single completion.
This limit of 48 hours should be adequate to accommodate most
operations.
MMS amended the final rule to clarify that the Regional Supervisor
has the authority to specify a shorter or longer flaring limit. In
addition, the MMS Regions are working on guidelines for extended
testing and flaring for deep water.
5. Section 250.175(a)(2)--One comment recommended that MMS delete
or define ``temporary'' which modified ``situations'' because it is too
vague.
Response
MMS agrees that the term ``temporary'' can be vague, and we deleted
it from the final rule.
6. Section 250.175(c)--One comment recommended that MMS define
``significant risk'' because it is vague.
Response
MMS has changed the phrase to ``significant risk that may harm.''
7. Several comments suggested that MMS mandate the type of burner
that it will permit a lessee to use.
Response
MMS recognizes that many burners exist with widely varying
specifications. However, since technology constantly changes, MMS feels
that it is impractical and too restrictive to mandate an allowable type
of burner. However, the
[[Page 25148]]
Regional Supervisor will take into account the type of burner industry
proposes to use when evaluating requests to burn liquids.
8. Several comments said that lessees can't predict test volumes or
other data that they will need for requests to flare or vent gas and
burn liquids.
Response
We realize that lessees can't precisely predict reservoir data. We
only ask that, as with all other pre-approval requirements, lessees
plan and, to the best of their ability, estimate well test results and
removal alternatives. The Regional Supervisor will work with lessees to
fairly evaluate requests.
Authors. Sharon Buffington and Jo Ann Lauterbach, Engineering
and Technology Division, MMS, prepared this document.
Executive Order (E.O.) 12866
This rule is not a significant rule under E.O. 12866.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Department of the Interior (DOI) determined that this rule will
not have a significant effect on a substantial number of small
entities. In general, we do not consider the entities that engage in
offshore activities small due to the technical and financial resources
and experience necessary to safely conduct such activities.
In addition, the DOI determined that this rule is not a major rule
because it will not result in an annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more. Also, this rule will not have significant adverse
effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, or
innovation. The largest cost to industry is for the cases when the
lessee must transport the liquid hydrocarbons instead of burning them.
Based on the number of well tests, the number of times transportation
would occur, the annual gross cost to industry to transport these
liquid hydrocarbons is $348,000.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The proposed information collection requirement contained in
Sec. 250.175 were approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
The OMB control number is 1010-0041. An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
The MMS estimates the public reporting burden for this information
will average 1.5 hours per response, including the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the date needed, and completing and reviewing the
information collection.
Takings Implication Assessment
The DOI that this rule does not represent a governmental action
capable of interference with constitutionally protected property
rights. Thus, a Takings Implication Assessment does not need to be
prepared pursuant to E.O. 12630, Government Action and Interference
with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights.
Unfunded Mandate Reform Act of 1995
This rule does not contain any unfunded mandates to State, local,
or tribal governments or the private sector.
E.O. 12988
The DOI certified to OMB that this rule meets the applicable civil
justice reform standards provided in Section 3(b)(2) of E.O. 12988.
National Environmental Policy Act
The DOI determined that this action does not constitute a major
Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human
environment; therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement is not
required.
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 250
Continental Shelf, Environmental impact statements, Environmental
protection, Government contracts, Incorporation by reference,
Investigations, Mineral royalties, Oil and gas development and
production, Oil and gas exploration, Oil and gas reserves, Penalties,
Pipelines, Public lands--mineral resources, Public lands--rights-of-
way, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulphur development and
production, Sulphur exploration, Surety bonds.
Dated: March 13, 1996.
Bob Armstrong,
Assistant Secretary, Land and Minerals Management.
For the reasons set forth above, MMS is amending 30 CFR part 250 as
follows:
PART 250--OIL AND GAS AND SULPHUR OPERATIONS IN THE OUTER
CONTINENTAL SHELF
1. The authority citation for part 250 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 43 U.S.C. 1334.
2. Section 250.175 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 250.175 Flaring or venting gas and burning liquid hydrocarbons.
(a) Lessees may flare or vent oil-well gas or gas-well gas without
receiving prior approval from the Regional Supervisor only in the
following situations:
(1) When gas vapors are flared or vented in small volumes from
storage vessels or other low-pressure production vessels and cannot be
economically recovered.
(2) During an equipment failure or to relieve system pressures. The
lessee must comply with the following conditions:
(i) Lessees must not flare or vent oil-well gas for more than 48
continuous hours unless the Regional Supervisor approves. The Regional
Supervisor may specify a limit of less than 48 hours to prevent air
quality degradation.
(ii) Lessees must not flare or vent gas from a facility for more
than 144 cumulative hours during any calendar month unless the Regional
Supervisor approves.
(iii) Lessees must not flare or vent gas-well gas beyond the time
required to eliminate an emergency unless the Regional Supervisor
approves.
(3) During the unloading or cleaning of a well, drill-stem testing,
production testing, or other well-evaluation testing. Flaring or
venting must not exceed 48 cumulative hours per testing operation on a
single completion. The Regional Supervisor may allow less time to
prevent air quality degradation or more time if lessees need additional
time to evaluate reservoir parameters.
(b) Lessees may flare or vent oil-well gas for up to 1 year when
the Regional Supervisor approves the request for one of the following
reasons:
(1) The lessee initiated an action which, when completed, will
eliminate flaring and venting; or
(2) The lessee submitted an evaluation supported by engineering,
geologic, and economic data indicating that either:
(i) The oil and gas produced from the well(s) will not economically
support the facilities necessary to save and/or sell the gas; or
(ii) There is not enough gas to market.
(c) Lessees may burn produced liquid hydrocarbons only if the
Regional Supervisor approves. To burn produced liquid hydrocarbons, the
lessee must demonstrate that the amounts to burn would be minimal, or
that the alternatives are infeasible or pose a significant risk that
may harm offshore personnel or the environment. Alternatives to burning
liquid hydrocarbons include transporting the liquids or storing and re-
injecting them into a producible zone.
[[Page 25149]]
(d) Lessees must prepare records detailing gas flaring or venting
and liquid hydrocarbon burning for each facility. The records must
include, at a minimum:
(1) Daily volumes of gas flared or vented and liquid hydrocarbons
burned;
(2) Number of hours of flaring, venting, or burning on a daily
basis;
(3) Reasons for flaring, venting, or burning; and
(4) A list of the wells contributing to flaring, venting, or
burning, along with the gas-oil ratio data.
(e) Lessees must keep these records for at least 2 years. Lessees
must allow Minerals Management Service representatives to inspect the
records at the lessees' field office that is nearest the Outer
Continental Shelf facility, or at another location agreed to by the
Regional Supervisor. If the Regional Supervisor requests to see the
records, lessees must provide a copy.
[FR Doc. 96-12544 Filed 5-17-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-MR-M
