The GPA Midstream Association has filed comments on the Environmental Protections Agency’s proposed addition of natural gas processing facilities to the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI).
“GPA Midstream believes this information is already being shared with the general public through a large number of state and federal regulations applicable to natural gas processing facilities,” said GPA Midstream Vice President of Government Affairs Matthew Hite. “In fact, most of the pertinent data reported under TRI is already in EPA’s own files due to existing regulatory programs under the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. In most cases, state regulatory agencies will already possess the data EPA is requesting in this proposal.”
Under the proposed rule, EPA estimates that natural gas processing facilities manufacture, process or otherwise use 21 different TRI-listed chemicals. EPA’s analysis only accounts for the 21 listed chemicals. EPA’s analysis does not account for costs associated with tracking and analysis of chemicals that are below the de minimus threshold but are required to be tracked as part of the 650-plus substances under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) section 313 that GPA Midstream members would be responsible for reporting.
GPA Midstream requested that EPA withdraw this proposed rule due to it being improperly vetted on inadequate data and little, if any, outreach to the affected industry.
“This is an unnecessary expansion of government regulation where the evidence as presented in the docket does not support the need to add natural gas processing facilities to the list of industries required to report to TRI under EPCRA,” Hite said. “It’s also important to note that EPA has completely underestimated the cost of this proposed rule on the industry and does not adequately assess the administrative burden of tracking and record keeping that this proposed rule passes onto GPA Midstream members.”