The National Environmental Policy Act and Oil and Gas Development in Region 8

1. The National Environmental Policy ActandOil and Gas DevelopmentinRegion 8 WESTAR Oil and Gas Conference October 22, 2008

2. EPA’s role in NEPA • Few EIS’s or EA’s are prepared by EPA -Wastewater treatment facility grants -Non-delegated program permits -Some permits on tribal lands • Section 309 of the Clean Air Act requires EPA to review all EIS’s from other Agencies and make written comments available to the public • Further CEQ and EPA guidance establishes a rating process for all EIS’s

3. EPA’s Rating System Adequacy of the Impact Statement • 1- Adequate • 2-Insufficient Information • 3-Inadequate Information

4. EPA’s Rating System Environmental Impact of the Action • LO (Lack of Objections) • EC (Environmental Concerns) • EO (Environmental Objections) • EU (Environmentally Unsatisfactory) • Potential violation of environmental standard • Sig. in severity, duration and scope • National Importance

5. EPA’s Role in NEPA • If adverse: “3” and/or Environmentally Unsatisfactory (EU): • EPA may refer the issue to the President’s Council on Environmental Quality for resolution. • Creates an administrative record • Can create signficant media attention • Environment not being protected

6. BLM RMP Revisions (# wells) 39 Class I National Park and Wilderness Areas

7. Jonah Field Location

8. The Jonah Infill Development Project EIS • BLM lead agency • Most dense gas development in region • Currently about 800 wells on 40 acre spacing • Proposed infill of 3100 additional wells on 5 acre spacing • Field to provide gas needs for 22 million households for 11 yrs: the entire western U.S. • Seventy miles from the Class I Bridger and Fitzpatrick Wilderness Areas

12. 31 Days of Visibility Impairment at Bridger +80% NOx Reduction in Rigs After 5 years an annual demonstration that impacts are 0 days +90% NOx reduction to date

13. Summary • The Jonah Infill EIS process demonstrates what can be accomplished through successful collaboration between the federal agencies and active state involvement, in this case EPA, BLM and Wyoming DEQ. • Bottom line: Environmental protection and energy development are not mutually exclusive. Collaboration can find a way.

14. EPA Region 8Air Quality Analysesfor Oil and Gas Activities under NEPA Federal Leadership Forum September 23, 2008

15. Checklist for AQ Analysis in Oil and Gas Activities Under NEPA • The Checklist covers key issues for EPA in reviewing AQ Analyses under NEPA • Need for Checklist is based on a continued “string” of poor air quality analysis • EPA’s continued effort to improve NEPA documents and avoid adverse ratings. • Inform agencies about EPA’s expectations • Encourage better collaboration and better stakeholder processes • Mitigation

16. Presentation Overview • Air Quality Workgroup and Modeling Protocol • Air Quality Analysis in Planning-Level NEPA Documents • Air Quality Analysis in Project-Level NEPA Documents • Mitigation • EPA Contacts

17. Importance of an AQ Workgroup and AQ Protocol • Based on our prior experience, EPA recommends: • Inter-agency AQ workgroup be formed • AQ Analysis Protocol be developed and vetted with the AQ Workgroup • The Protocol provides a roadmap for how analysis will be conducted and the results presented • Formal recognition that workgroup agrees or has the option of elevating unresolved issues • All significant issues be resolved prior to initiating modeling • Collaboration requires more time up front, but will save time later

18. AQ Analysis in Planning-LevelNEPA Documents • Given the wide range of planning and project-level decisions, the level of AQ analysis is considered case-by-case. • The level of analysis needs to support the level of decision being made and the “area” specific issues.

19. Planning-Level NEPA Documents • EPA Region 8 considers the following factors in evaluating the appropriate level of air quality analysis: • Number of projected oil and gas wells. • Distance of the planning area from Class I airsheds. • Distance from other sensitive receptors (i.e., National Parks, Class II areas, sensitive populations).

20. Planning-Level NEPA Documents Factors to Consider in NEPA Reviews continued • Distance from areas approaching a National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). • Availability of recent, relevant, and comprehensive AQ modeling data prior to management planning Draft EIS. • Whether relevant, comprehensive and cumulative AQ analysis is concurrently completed with a project-specific EIS in the management planning area. • Potential for cumulative adverse impacts to AQ from projects in adjacent planning areas.

21. Example of How EPA Region 8 Has Applied These Factors • Little Snake RMP Draft EIS • More than 3,000 potential oil and gas wells • Proximity of the planning area to five Class I airsheds • No recent, relevant air quality analysis and low likelihood of AQ modeling being conducted in the future • EPA Region 8 recommended air quality modeling be conducted to provide the decision-maker with the level of information necessary to support the decision-making process.

22. Example of How EPA Region 8 Has Applied These Factors • Kemmerer Resource Management Plan Draft EIS • BLM concurrently completing AQ modeling for the Moxa Arch Draft EIS. • Moxa Arch included approximately 90% of the anticipated oil and gas development in the Kemmerer planning area. • EPA Region 8 did not recommend additional air quality modeling for the RMP because of the concurrent AQ modeling being conducted for Moxa Arch. EPA Region 8 recommended the mitigation measures identified and supported by the Moxa Arch air quality modeling be more broadly considered for implementation across the planning area in the RMP.

23. Mitigation • As we’ve stated in scoping comment letters: • If an air quality analysis discloses significant adverse impacts to air quality, the NEPA document should consider and analyze mitigation to address the impacts. • Here are examples of some of these measures: • Tier II or greater drilling rigs • Centralized gathering facilities • Green completions • New measures are evolving.

24. Checklist for AQ Analysis in Oil and Gas Activities Under NEPA • The Checklist covers key issues for EPA in conducting AQ Analyses under NEPA • Air Quality Workgroup and Modeling Protocol • AQ Analysis in Planning-Level NEPA Documents • AQ Analysis in Project-Level NEPA Documents • AQ Modeling and Approaches to Analysis • Not included in presentation, but in Checklist • Technical modeling and analysis approaches • Analysis of Air Quality Related Values (i.e. visibility) • Not included in presentation, but in Checklist • Includes calculation methodologies and presentation of results • Mitigation

25. EPA Region 8 Contacts • For further information, questions, comments etc., please call: • Larry Svoboda, Director, EPA Region 8 NEPA Program, 303-312-6004 • Joyel Dhieux, EPA Region 8 NEPA Reviewer, 303-312-6647 • Ken Distler, EPA Region 8 Air Quality NEPA Lead, 303-312-6043 • Kevin Golden, EPA National Modeling Expert, 303-312-6442