环保署2016年甲烷排放规则 它该留下还是离开EPA’s 2016 Methane Rule Should It Stay or Should It Go? in 2018

特朗普政府已将增加美国石油和天然气产量列为优先事项，部分原因是通过减轻联邦监管负担，而政府称这限制了发展。特朗普总统于2017年3月签署了行政命令（EO）13783，要求各机构审查现有的规则、政策、指导文件，以及更多可能对国内生产能源的开发或使用造成负担的文件。该条例还明确规定了适用于石油和天然气行业的审查条例，包括土地管理局（土地管理局）的甲烷条例。1条例13771，该条例要求各机构必须为实施的每项新条例删除两项条例，强调需要对正在考虑取消或修改的所有主要条例进行成本效益分析（新条例的做法也是如此）。但它也提出了一项有争议的要求，即在遵循“两对一”的要求时，在确定废除规则的优先次序时，只考虑废除所节省的成本（而不是放弃的收益或净收益）。96名经济学家和专家在3月份写给特朗普政府的信（Linn和Krupnick，2017）中对这一要求表示担忧。在这些行动之后，我们在未来的资源（RFF）试图首先列出现有的联邦条例颁布后，2005和非监管联邦活动关注的石油和天然气工业。2，然后我们转向了解什么对工业和公众的影响可能是，如果这些法规中的一些被淘汰，修改，或者延迟。我们通过更新原始机构监管影响分析（RIA）中使用的参数、评估与废除和修改以下规则相关的成本节约和放弃利益来分析这些影响：•土地管理局（BLM）的“废物预防，按使用费生产，和资源保护“规则；•环境保护署（EPA）“石油和天然气部门：新、重建和修改的源的排放标准新源性能标准”规则；•安全和环境执行局（BSEE）“外部大陆架防喷器系统中的油气和硫磺作业和井控规则”；•管道和危险材料安全管理局（PHMSA）“危险材料：加强罐车标准和作业控制《高危险易燃品列车规则》；BSEE和海洋能源管理局（BOEM）的《北极外大陆架勘探钻探要求》规则；以及PHMSA的“管道安全：输气管道完整性管理程序”规则。这份报告分析了美国环保署的甲烷规则，3该规则规定了

The Trump administration has prioritized increasing the production of US oil and natural gas, in part through reducing federal regulatory burdens that the administration says restrict development. President Trump signed Executive Order (EO) 13783 in March 2017, requiring agencies to review existing rules, policies, guidance documents, and more that potentially burden the development or use of domestically produced energy resources. This EO also specifically identified for review regulations applicable to the oil and gas sector, including the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM’s) methane rule.1  EO 13771, which ordered that agencies must remove two rules for every new rule implemented, emphasized that cost-benefit analysis is required for all major regulations being considered for elimination or modification (as has been the practice for new regulations). But it also laid out the controversial requirement that only the cost savings from repeal be considered in prioritizing rules for repeal in that cost savings (and not forgone benefits or net benefits) be counted when complying with the two-for-one requirement. Ninety-six economists and experts expressed concerns about this requirement in a March letter to the Trump administration (Linn and Krupnick 2017).  Following these actions, we at Resources for the Future (RFF) sought to first catalog existing federal regulations promulgated after 2005 and non-regulatory federal activities of concern to the oil and gas industry.2 We then turned toward understanding what the impacts on industry and the public might be if some of     these regulations were eliminated, modified, or delayed. We analyzed these impacts by updating the parameters used in the original agency regulatory impact analyses (RIAs) and assessing the cost savings and forgone benefits associated with repealing and modifying the following rules:  •the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM’s) “Waste Prevention, Production Subject to Royalties, and Resource Conservation” rule;  •the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) “Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources New Source Performance Standards” rule;  •the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement’s (BSEE’s) “Oil and Gas and Sulfur Operations in the Outer Continental Shelf-Blowout Preventer Systems and Well Control Rule”;  •the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration’s (PHMSA’s) “Hazardous Materials: Enhanced Tank Car Standards and Operational Controls for High-Hazard Flammable Trains” rule;  •BSEE’s and Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s (BOEM’s) “Oil and Gas and Sulphur Operations on the Outer Continental Shelf—Requirements for Exploratory Drilling on the Arctic Outer Continental Shelf” rule; and  •PHMSA’s “Pipeline Safety: Integrity Management Program for Gas Distribution Pipelines” rule.  This report analyzes EPA’s methane rule,3 which regulates methane emissions from new