Greenhouse Gas Reporting For Transmission Companies; Pipeline Safety Issues Crop Up

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) softened some of the prospective greenhouse gas (GHG) monitoring requirements for the natural gas transmission companies but the supplemental rule the agency published March 22 left the industry miffed nonetheless.

Lisa Beal, director, Environment and Construction Policy, Interstate Natural Gas Association of America (INGAA), explains that the EPA did follow some of the suggestions the industry made after the agency published a worrisome proposed rule in April 2009.

The supplemental rule - which will be made final sometime this year after the agency examines comments - focuses more on significant sources of fugitive emissions of methane within the natural gas transmission industry. That is the good news. The bad news is that the type of monitoring of those sources that would be required will be much more costly than warranted, according to Beal.

"While we are happy EPA at least limited monitoring to certain components, we still maintain that the program is not the way to get measurement of fugitive emissions," she states.

Fiji C. George, director, Climate Change Strategies, El Paso Corp., says much the same thing.

"While EPA accepted some of our comments directing the focus of the proposal on major emitting sources, compliance with the rule for our production and transmission segments will be challenging due to the vast number of emission components to be monitored," he offers. El Paso, like INGAA and other individual companies, will be pressing EPA to make changes in the final rule.

One of the industry's major objections is that the supplemental would require direct measurement - the most expensive technology - for five emission sources: storage tanks (transmission) when scrubber dump valves are detected leaking, centrifugal compressor wet seal oil degassing vents, large reciprocating compressor rod packing vents, large compressor blowdown vent valve leaks, and large compressor blowdown vent (unit isolation valve leaks), the latter two when leakage is detected.

For direct measurement, EPA proposes that the following technologies be used: high volume samplers, meters (such as rotameters, turbine meters, hot wire anemometers, and others), and/or calibrated bags. Other sources which would require monitoring, though not by direct methods, include: reciprocating and centrifugal compressors, including compressor and station blowdowns, centrifugal compressor wet and dry seals, wet seal oil degassing vents, reciprocating compressor rod packing vents, unit isolation valves, blowdown valves, compressor scrubber dump valves, and gas pneumatic continuous bleed devices.

Monitoring of all sources included in the rule would have to start on Jan. 1, 2011 with the first reports going to the EPA by March 31, 2011. The EPA proposed rule will only require reporting of methane sources at compression stations emitting more than 25,000 metric tons a year of CO2 equivalent. That would subject 1,145 transmission facilities, or 59% of the total, to monitoring and reporting requirements.

The supplemental rule also covers onshore petroleum and natural gas production, offshore petroleum and natural gas production, natural gas processing, natural gas transmission compressor stations, underground natural gas storage, LNG storage, LNG import and export terminals, and distribution. EPA is not proposing to include reporting of fugitive emissions from natural gas pipeline segments between compressor stations.