2022: EPA Methane Regulations

Policy Engagement Overview

Following heavy negative lobbying on the November 2021 EPA methane proposal, the oil and gas industry has continued to take positions to oppose and weaken the November 2022 supplementary proposal.

Latest Lobbying Trends

• US oil and gas and cross-sector industry associations continued to oppose and lobby to weaken the newly proposed regulation in February 2023, including American Petroleum Institute (API), National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), Texas Oil & Gas Association (TXOGA), US Chamber of Commerce. Several industry associations did not support the supplementary rule’s Super-Emitters Response Program, including the American Chemistry Council, American Exploration & Production Council (AXPC), and Business Roundtable.

• Some oil and gas companies took mixed positions on the proposed regulations, including BP, Chevron, Devon Energy, and Occidental. However, ExxonMobil and Coterra Energy did not support key elements of the proposal including by advocating for greater flexibilities and questioning third-party monitoring measures.

• Several US utilities which previously took supportive positions on the first rule did not provide comments on the supplementary proposal in February 2023, leaving a gap in corporate support. European industrial company ABB Inc submitted a positive comment, supporting the inclusion of all wells in the regulation. Shell also appeared to offer top-line support for the supplementary proposal.

Long-term Lobbying Trends

• Several powerful cross-sector and oil and gas sector specific industry associations lobbied to weaken the initial, January 2022 proposed methane standards, such as the American Petroleum Institute (API), Gas Association (AGA), US Chamber of Commerce (USC), and National Association of Manufacturers (NAM). Among other arguments, the API, USC, and AGA each challenged the EPA’s legal authority under the Clean Air Act to require states to update methane emissions performance standards for existing facilities.

• Oil and gas companies have taken differing positions on the proposed regulations. ExxonMobil, Shell, and BP took mixed positions, while Chevron attempted to weaken key components of the regulation by opposing measures around monitoring and repairing methane leaks, emphasizing feasibility and cost effectiveness concerns, and questioning the legal basis for ‘community monitoring.’

• The largest utilities in the US also engaged with differing positions. Ten utilities submitted a negative joint comment, while four – Consolidated Edison, Exelon, National Grid, and Pacific Gas & Electric – submitted a positive joint comment. National Grid engaged with contradictory positions, joining both the negative and positive joint comments alongside its own positive comment.

• Current oil and gas lobbying efforts contradict recent top-line statements from the industry in support of direct federal regulation of methane, including from the AGA and USC, as well as companies Shell, BP, and ExxonMobil among others.